INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9316201
A history of women in Germanics, 1850-1950
Nagy, Ellen Manning, Ph.D.
The Ohio State University, 1993
Copyright ©1993 by Nagy, Ellen Manning. All rights reserved.
UMI 300 N. ZeebRd. Ann Aibor, MI 48106 A HISTORY OF WOMEN IN GERMANICS, 1850-1950
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Ellen Manning Nagy, B.A., M.A.
The Ohio State University
1993
Dissertation Committee: Approved by Charles W. Hoffmann David P. Benseler Leslie Adelson Dagmar Lorenz Charles W. Hoffmai dvisor Department of Germanic/ nguages and Literature Copyright by Ellen Manning Nagy 1993 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I want to express sincere appreciation to the members of my committee, Charles
W. Hoffmann, Leslie Adelson and Dagmar Lorenz, for their suggestions, comments, and guidance. I am indebted to David P. Benseler, whose move to an endowed professorship at Case Western Reserve University prior to the actual completion of the dissertation meant that, under Ohio State University’s rules, he could no longer serve as chair of my committee, for his insights into this project, his professional advice and most importantly his friendship. My special thanks as well to Charles W. Hoffmann for agreeing to chair the committee in the final phase of the project, and to TEM, JLM and PDN, thanks for having faith in me. VITA
September 30, 1959 Bom - Oberlin, Ohio
1981...... B.A., Colorado College
1985 ...... M.A., Bowling Green State University
FIELD OF STUDY
Major Field: Germanic Languages and Literature TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... ii
VITA . .'...... iii
LIST OF TABLES...... v
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION...... 1
H. STATE OF RESEARCH ...... 24 m . PUBLICATION ACTIVITY OF WOMEN GERMANISTS ...... 42
IV. WOMEN AND THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF TEACHERS OF GERM AN...... 84
V. THE TEACHING STATUS OF WOMEN IN AMERICAN GERMANICS...... 121
VI. CONCLUSION...... 181
APPENDIX A ...... 204
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CONSULTED...... 205 LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1 Male/Female Distribution of Doctorates, 1981-85...... 37
2 Percentage of Women Faculty, 1981-85...... 37
3 Faculty and Women Faculty in German, Totals at Select Universities, 1938-39 through 1948-49...... 50
4 Article Totals for Germanic Journals, 1889-1949...... 62
5 Article Totals for Journals in Modem Languages, 1889-1949...... 65
6 Distribution of Articles Authored by Women, 1889-1949...... 69
7 Elected Officers—President and First Vice-President, 1927-1991, of the American Association of Teachers of G erm...... an 101
8 Elected Officers—Second and Third Vice-President, 1927-1991 of the American Association of Teachers of German...... 105
9 Elected Officers—Secretary, 1927-90 of the American Association of Teachers of G e rm a n ...... 109
10 Number and Percentage of Doctoral Degrees Granted by American Universities to Women in Germanics, 1861-1949...... 125
11 Comparison of Female Faculty Rank 1939/40 and 1989/90...... 129
12 Number and Percentage of Women by Rank by Year, 1938/39 - 1948/49 and 1989/90 ...... 131
13 Number and Percentage of Faculty Women in Germanics Based on Institutional Type: Four Year Women’s and Men’s Colleges...... 134
v 14 Number and Percentage of Faculty Women in Germanics Based on Institutional Type: Public and Private Universities...... 135
15 Number and Percentage of Faculty Women in Germanics Based on Institutional Type: Land Grant Colleges...... 136
16 Comparison of Women’s Institutional Affiliation: 1938/39 and 1989-90...... 137
17 Total Number and Percentage of Faculty Women by Rank According to Institutional Type, 1938-39 through 1948-49...... 139
18 Number and Percentage of Faculty Women by Rank According to Institutional Type, 1989-90...... 140
vi CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Recent years have witnessed a surge of interest in an historical evaluation and assessment of the German teaching profession in the United States. Events such as the Bicentennial of the United States (1976), the Tricentennial of the first
German settlement at Germantown (1983), and the hundredth anniversary of the
Modem Language Association of America (1983) have stimulated interest in the past and in its evaluation. Moreover, a number of research projects, professional organizations, and individual language periodicals have encouraged further research into the origins and development of the profession.
Much discussion has been devoted to assessing the aims, structures, and functions of the German-teaching profession in the United States and to finding a method of collecting and interpreting data "so as to better understand the ups and downs of Germanistik during the past 150 years or so."1 Although publications on various aspects of the history of the profession have increased in number, left largely untouched is the role of women in the development of German studies in the
United States.
This dissertation attempts to provide the first comprehensive analysis of the roles and contributions of women in the profession of Germanics in the United States between 1850 and 1950. "Role" refers to a woman’s position and status as teacher and scholar in higher education, more specifically as faculty members in four-year colleges and universities. "Contribution" denotes the professional endeavors of and service rendered by a woman while serving on the faculty of any four-year higher educational institution in this country, i.e. the introduction or improvement of pedagogical methods and curricular innovations, articles and books written and published, and responsibilities within professional service organizations and on college campuses. Throughout this study I use the term "Germanist" to mean the individual who devotes most of his/her working career to the study and teaching of German language, literature, and/or culture and the term "Germanics" to refer collectively to that study and teaching, that is, to the discipline itself. This dissertation demonstrates that women have traditionally been subordinate members of the profession and that their activities have been undervalued or ignored by male professionals in American Germanics. Specifically, I examine women’s involvement in Germanics in three areas—publishing, teaching, and professional service—using the careers of four women as examples. After I compiled a frequency list of female names from professional journal indices, I randomly selected five women to feature in the dissertation.2 Although the four women who are highlighted seem outstanding, my intent is not to produce a history of exceptional women in Germanics. The women selected here may not be representative per se, but their careers are significant because they illustrate a segment of the history of Germanics that has been heretofore overlooked. While women in Germanics come from a variety of backgrounds, the social and cultural obstacles each must overcome in becoming part of the profession is essentially the same.3 As the biographies of these women show, no clear pattern exists for women’s entrance into or advancement in the profession. The academic environment, like that of any profession, requires women to possess superior motivation, above-average evidence of talent and training, and extraordinary persistence to gain the professional advancements and remuneration their male counterparts expect. The personal histories and accomplishments are intended to illustrate a few examples of women’s activities and experiences in Germanics.
An understanding of the roles of women in Germanics begins with comprehending those of women in the totality of American higher education. An analysis of the historical roles and activities of women in higher education shows clearly that women were actively involved as students and as faculty from the beginning of the twentieth century. Moreover, women were proportionally more active in modem languages than they were in other disciplines. Once these roles are established, the influence of individual women in Germanics will be examined.
One of the primary roles of faculty women before 1920 was to act as disciplinarians and social advisors for female students.4 Later, the formation of departments where the majority of students would be female (for example, departments of pedagogy, home economics, social work, library science, and nursing) gave women more opportunities to acquire teaching positions. Higher education for women in the United States began in the first half of the nineteenth century. By 1900, forty percent of American college students were women, and women were also regularly teaching on college faculties.5 The founding of women’s colleges (Vassar, 1865; Smith and Wellesley, 1875; and Bryn
Mawr, 1884), and the general growth in graduate education were important developments influencing the admission of women into college teaching positions.6
Graduate training was less accessible for women in the early decades of the twentieth century, therefore many women, as did men, studied and received terminal degrees abroad.7 The first American PhD was awarded in 1861; the first doctoral degree awarded to a woman was in 1877.
Women have traditionally made up the majority of elementary and secondary school teachers,8 however, college teaching, like the practice of law and medicine, was a highly prestigious and male dominated occupation.9 Thus the entrance of women into the higher educational academic profession is a significant event.
Marion O. Hawthorne writes: "Women properly trained have long been recognized in this country, and in others as well, as the most desirable teachers of children in the elementary schools. They have also taken their place in the secondary schools, and outnumber the men as teachers there as well. However, in the field of college teaching, they have not been widely accepted, nor uniformly recognized and advanced."10 Women frequently and consistently obtained positions at women’s institutions; however, around 1910 their teaching opportunities shifted to the newer land-grant colleges. These colleges—the University of Kentucky, Iowa State University, Rutgers, the University of Illinois, to name a few—hired significant numbers of women in faculty positions, in part due to "a decline in professional salaries and a concomitant expansion of opportunities in business" which drew men away from college teaching.11 Another reason for the increase of women on college faculties was that they were more willing than men to accept lower salaries.
In general, however, men on college faculties and in administrative positions were reluctant to hire and promote women for fear that being associated with women would raise doubts about their own professional status.12 Some men supported women faculty as long as they remained in departments other than their own and at the lower ranks. The explanation for this attitude is that men do not want to be associated with a "feminine" position, fearing that college teaching would become a feminized profession as elementary and secondary school teaching had.13
One indicator of women’s early professional involvement in academe is their participation in the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), founded in 1915. Women were frequently elected to AAUP council positions, and served as committee heads and as vice presidents.14 However, by 1921
Committee W had been formed to report on the status of women in colleges and universities. Although reports from the committee indicate that women were actively participating in the academic profession, the fact that Committee W was even formed suggests that women were still not widely accepted or recognized in higher education in the early decades of the twentieth century.15 Histories of American colleges and universities tend to document the general, overall developments of higher education. When women appear in such
studies, they do so normally in chapters devoted to the development of coeducation
and/or of women’s colleges.16 Current studies on the present and historical
situation of professional women focus largely on the lack of recognition given and
the subsequent low status awarded to women in the academy.17 Biographical
accounts of individual women usually focus on those in administrative positions,
such as dean of women, who contributed to the general development of higher
education.18 In fact, it has been pointed out that a "definitive history of female
participation on university faculties has yet to be written."19 Clearly such a task is
a monumental undertaking, but one which can at least be initiated by documenting
the history of individual academic disciplines.
Modem languages in American colleges and universities had been excluded
or barely recognized in the curriculum until they began to emerge as distinct fields
of study in the mid-nineteenth century. For example, Edwin Zeydel mentions
(p. 334) that although several colleges began teaching German (Amherst College,
1824; Bowdoin College, 1820; Harvard, 1825), the study of German was not part
of the "regular course of study" but, rather, was a non or half-credit course in
which enrollment was low.20 Even in the mid-nineteenth century, Zeydel
continues, (p. 340) "the teaching of modem languages and literatures remained
what it had been, a sort of tutorial sideline or extracurricular activity." At this time
modem languages—English, French and German—began to be substituted for the earlier Latin or Greek requirement. The progress of modem language study then was due in part to the importance of familiarizing students with the languages and literatures that, because of increasingly closer relations with foreign countries, would socially and politically influence their lives.21 However, whether modem languages were suitable subjects as college courses was a controversial issue.
Many scholars believed that changing the college curriculum to include modem languages would not give students the same solid background they achieved by studying the classical languages and would result in wasted time. Thomas Bertrand
Bronson noted in 1894; "When the scientific and the modem language courses both in the fitting school and in the college, shall demand in time and labor the equivalent of the Greek course, then and not until then will those groups be held in more nearly equal esteem with the old classical group."22 By the late nineteenth century modem languages had become a recognized discipline. Not only was the
Modem Language Association founded in 1883, but several professional journals devoted exclusively to modem language study were also established—Modem
Language Notes (1885), Americana Germanica (1897), Journal of English and
Germanic Philology (1897).
The Humanities has typically been viewed as a "female" area. Geraldine J.
Clifford points out (p. 9) that, language and literature fields were attractive to women because these disciplines often led directly to high school teaching positions.23 Clifford also notes (p. 9) that "...by 1900 [male students were] beginning to think of higher education as providing explicit training for business, engineering, and the male-dominated profession." Based on available data from previous studies, women represented thirty-two percent of college faculty in the
United States in 1930 and twenty-seven percent in 1971/72 and 1983. In 1971 and
1976 the comparable figure for women in modem languages was thirty-seven and thirty-five percent respectively.24 Few women of that twenty-eight percent in 1930 were working in scientific disciplines, but one can assume from statistical data that the proportion of women in technical fields (excluding home economics) was greater in 1972 and 1983 than in 1930.25 One conclusion to be drawn is that the impact of women in the humanities was potentially greater and historically more significant than in other academic fields. In fact Jessie Bernard points out, "it has been in languages and literature - English composition, French grammar, German grammar, Spanish grammar, and the like -... that women have traditionally made their major contribution.1,26 Although conclusive data on women on modem language faculties are unavailable, figures based on information compiled from faculty listings in professional language journals suggest that women were deeply involved and widely represented in modem languages.
Women have been engaged in all aspects—developing textbooks and new methodologies, teaching and research, and in professional organizations—of the profession from the beginning. Why then have they been relegated to sub categories in histories, to footnotes and/or side remarks? Edwin Zeydel’s account of the profession, "The Teaching of German in the United States from Colonial
Times to the Present," illustrates a critical lack of documentation on professional 9 women. He does not exclude women, but their accomplishments receive only cursory comment. He writes for example;
German did not gain real distinction at Yale until 1856, when William D. Whitney added German to Sanskrit and enriched the teaching possibilities with his excellent grammar, reader, and dictionary. His daughter Marian became equally famous later at Vassar (341).
This period [the first decades of the twentieth century] was also marked by the development of some excellent German Summer Schools, particularly that of Middlebury College in Vermont, first started in 1915 by Professors Marian Whitney and Lilian Stroebe of Vassar... (364).
Miss Stroebe will be remembered also for the highly successful elementary German course at Vassar, originally devised by Marian Whitney (364).
Surely the idea of the summer school, which continues today, and a "highly successful" language course, i.e. one of the first in the United States devoted to the exclusive use of German in the classroom, merit more than a casual reference in an article on the teaching of German in the United States. Although some scholars would reproach Zeydel for referring to Stroebe as "Miss" rather than "Dr.," the criticism is moot since Zeydel rarely uses professional forms of address in his survey. Currently, much of what has been done on the historical aspects of
German Studies in the United States has focused either on documenting the teaching profession and its methods or on reactions to historical events. Few accounts seem to exist on professional accomplishments by women in German during the early 10 decades of the twentieth century. Even the recent Teaching German in America.
Prolegomena to a History (1988) lists only those women who contributed to the development of the Kindergarten movement.27
The women who have left their imprint on Germanics in the United States, like their male counterparts, are those who were instrumental in designing and teaching college German courses, writing textbooks and scholarly essays, and actively involved in the professional language organizations. Despite the significant
influence of women on the development of Germanics and an extensive amount of available documentation (journal articles, notes and news sections, faculty listings, personal histories), nothing has been done to organize this material into a comprehensive account of female participation in Germanics. Not only did women hold permanent, full-time faculty positions, they also actively participated in the
Modem Language Association (MLA) and the American Association of Teachers of
German (AATG), by presenting papers at annual meetings, and serving as
committee and executive council members. For example, between 1918-1949, of a
total 600 papers on German language or literature topics at the annual MLA
meetings women presented thirty-four papers (six percent),28 twenty-one sat on
committees, but only two were elected to executive council positions. Between
1932-58 only twelve papers were presented by women at the annual AATG
meetings; however, forty-nine women were elected to executive council or vice-
presidential positions. Between 1928-1950 women acted as associate editors of The
German Quarterly, the official organ of the AATG, but not until 1978, was a 11 woman, Ruth Angress, appointed as editor. Despite the dominance of women in
German pedagogy, the Unterrichtspraxis. the pedagogical offshoot of The German
Quarterly, did not have a female editor until its fourteenth volume in 1981.
The contributions of women in German from a historical perspective have been overlooked for too long. Any history of the discipline must be found seriously lacking when the roles of women are not discussed or when women are not given credit proportionate to their accomplishments. There is a need to collect and evaluate data on women in Germanics, as well as a need to assess their contributions to this discipline.
The careers and accomplishments of four women—Marian P. Whitney
(1861-1947), Lilian L. Stroebe (1865-1960), Melitta Gerhard (1891-1981), and
Helen Adolf (1895-)—who taught at American universities between 1905 and 1963, were chosen for this study because of their achievements in scholarship, their contributions to Germanics as a profession, and/or their attainment of a position of major professional responsibility, i.e. departmental chairs and/or executive council members or officers of professional organizations. So as to give examples of the current century, I have included two women who taught in the early decades of the twentieth century and two whose careers began in the forties and reached well into the early 1960s.
In the forty-year span of her professional career, Marian Whitney’s main interest was teaching and it was here that she left her imprint on Germanics in the
United States. Whitney was bom in 1859 and received her PhD from Yale in 12
1901. In 1905 she went to Vassar as Professor of Comparative Literature and to serve as chairperson of the German department, a position she retained until her retirement in 1929. Soon after her arrival at Vassar, German classes were reorganized. This reorganization established that all beginning classes were practice sessions in speaking, rather than the traditional custom of memorizing grammar and translating German into English. In addition all literature classes were conducted entirely in the German language, a radical departure from the accepted practice.
Although this change is recognized now, at the time it was considered progressive.
As well as being concerned with students, Whitney was also occupied with
teacher preparation. Because Vassar resisted offering minimal work in pedagogy until 1925, it was significant that in 1916 she introduced a program at Vassar to aid
professional training for modem language teachers.29 Her one year program
brought together graduate students from many colleges and members of the Vassar
German faculty for the purpose of speaking German inside and outside the
classroom. The year was planned as a substitute for a year abroad because at the
time (1916) no one was able to travel to Germany or Austria, but more importantly,
Whitney felt that only on an American campus could future language teachers have
the type of training needed to teach foreign languages to American students. In
collaboration with Lilian Stroebe, Whitney edited several textbooks and wrote a
history of German literature which is described as the "first history of German
Literature written in simple German for American students, with brief introductory 13 chapters which show the historical events and changes in economic and social conditions, forming the background of every new movement in literature."30
Providing American Germanics with the idea and foundation of a German summer school devoted to the exclusive use of German was Lilian Stroebe’s lasting contribution to the profession in the United States. Stroebe spent her entire teaching career (1905 to her retirement in 1943) at Vassar. Together with Marian
Whitney, she established (1912) and developed what is now known as the
Middlebury Summer School. Stroebe herself conducted and financed the first two years of this school. When founded, the school was run on an entirely new vision based on the exclusive use of the foreign language and designed to give teachers and others who used German an opportunity for superior training. In 1927 Stroebe began to conduct a similar school at Mount Holyoke. Attendance at the Mount
Holyoke Summer School doubled in its second year (1928), "proving clearly that this particular type of school fills the definite need, not only for teachers of
German, but for all those men and women who need German as a tool for advanced work in other subjects. "31
Bom in Berlin in 1891, Melitta Gerhard received her doctorate from the university there in 1918. She became the first Frau Privatdozent in German literature at a German university in 1927 (Christian-Albrechts University (Kiel)).
After immigrating to the United States in 1933, she taught at Wellesley, Rockford
College, the University of Missouri, and finally Wittenberg University (chair 1946-
56) in Ohio. 14
Not only did Helen Adolf create a versatile and prolific body of scholarship, which included monographs on medieval literature and philology and original poetry
(Werden und Seiri). she also has been concerned with the question of woman’s role in professional life. Sheema Z. Buehne, a friend and colleague, writes, "... in the course of her teaching she has tried to stimulate her women students to greater scholarly achievement, for she has always felt that woman has something particular to contribute to the academic world. "3Z
Bom in Vienna in 1895 Adolf received her doctorate in Germanics, with honors, from the University of Vienna in 1923. She immigrated to Philadelphia in
1939. After teaching in several private secondary schools, she met Phillip Alison
Shelley who recruited her to Pennsylvania State University in 1946. Adolf continued at Penn State, where she was named the first Liberal Arts Research
Scholar (1958), until her retirement in 1963.
Researching and compiling a part of a history of the German profession poses several problems. Not only are there fewer individuals with firsthand knowledge of and experience in the profession, but also valuable primary materials have been lost due to lack of interest or lack of recognition of their significance to the history of Germanics. Germanists often fail to leave—in their department or an appropriate archive—documents relevant to their activities.33 Likewise, organizations often do not maintain adequate records of activities, membership, and committee reports. For example, the American Association of Teachers of German does not have any membership records earlier than 1978 except those published in 15
The German Quarterly.34 Even available data have not been systematically gathered and organized. A survey of selected professional journals—articles, reviews, news and notes sections—will help illuminate past and present aims and attitudes of individuals and of the profession in general. In addition, the history of professional and scholarly organizations, an important part of professional life, is also documented directly and indirectly in journals: that of the Modem Language
Association in PMLA: the American Association of Teachers of German in The
German Quarterly: the Nationaler Deutschamerikanischer Lehrerbund in
Monatshefte and, less directly, the National Federation of Modem Language
Teachers Associations in The Modem Language Journal. Therefore, the establishment of a database and a thorough review of the professional publications in Germanics in the United States are needed to interpret and assess the contribution and impact of individual scholars within the profession. For these reasons one obvious source for my dissertation is the professional language journals.
Scholarship constitutes only part of a professional career in higher education in the United States. In order to gain a comprehensive grasp of women’s role in
Germanics, individual careers, books, college and departmental archives, memoirs and correspondence (when available) have been consulted. Only by analyzing and interpreting the records of the past, including scholarship, unpublished documents, and past perceptions can our current understanding of the profession be broadened.
This awareness can be enhanced by conducting oral interviews with members of the 16 profession whose recollections can contribute to the overall development of the
Germanics.
Personal accounts by emeriti who taught in the early years of this century not only offer viewpoints and reveal aspects of the profession which might not otherwise come to light, but they also supplement and clarify historical documents.
Furthermore those emeriti provide recollections of their own careers, as well as information on older Germanists with whom they studied and worked. A successful example of this oral interview process is Henry J. Schmidt’s interview with
Hermann J. Weigand.35 Because fewer and fewer professionals remain who have firsthand recollections of the early years of Germanics in the United States, the interview process can no longer be postponed. Therefore, my own contact with
Helen Adolf constitutes one aspect of this study. Since most of the women who taught during the early decades of Germanics have since passed away (Marian
Whitney, 1947; Lilian Stroebe, 1960; and Melitta Gerhard, 1981), an additional route to understanding lies in the investigation of personal histories. Interviews and biographical information will thus supplement factual information gleaned from journals, textbooks, and university archives.
The years between 1850 and 1950 constitute the time frame of this study.
The initial date, 1850, was chosen for two reasons. First, because it marks the emergence of modem languages as a recognized academic discipline. By this time
German departments existed at some major universities (Michigan; Johns Hopkins) and some professional language organizations—the MLA (1883); the Nationale 17
Deutschamerikanischer Lehrerbund (1916) and scholarly journals Modem Language
Notes. 1885; Americana Germanica. 1897; Journal of English and Germanic
Philology. 1897; PMLA. 1883 had been established. Second, although the first
American doctorate was awarded in 1861, only in the last quarter of the 19th century did graduate education became available to women. Graduate training finally allowed women to acquire the same qualifications for college and university teaching as men.36 Moreover, the increasing number of tax-supported universities opened additional employment opportunities for female faculty.
The concluding date (1950) was chosen because it takes us to the eve of the impact of the women’s movement and the changes the profession has witnessed since that time. The proportion of women in academe dropped notably during the late 1940s due, in part, to the G.I. Bill which covered married veterans and therefore, "...encourages marriage, thereby adversely affecting, at least in the short run, the educational and career prospects of many women. "37 The drop in women’s academic employment during the late 1940s and 1950s, as well as general changes in American higher education and society beginning in the 1960s, changed the course of women’s academic history. Although data exist on women before
1950, rarely have they been assembled into comprehensive accounts, although several studies evaluate educational trends and individual contributions by women in modem languages from World War II to the present.38 It is essential that an historical study of the role of women in Germanics be available to provide the framework for further analysis of the status of women in the profession. Some 18 current data are included for comparison with those from 1860 to 1950 to demonstrate how the profession has changed, specifically via the introduction of
German Studies and the Coalition of Women in German (WiG). I hope to provide other researchers with a historical foundation that will contribute to a clear understanding of the changes in the profession that resulted from social and political trends after 1950.
The chapters of this dissertation examine the criteria by which academic success is characterized: research, teaching, and professional service. Each of the main chapters identifies and illustrates the roles and contributions of women in
Germanics in each area, referring to individual achievements by Whitney, Stroebe,
Gerhard, and Adolf which illustrate trends seen in the profession. 19
1. Walter F. W. Lohnes, "Prolegomena to a History of German Studies in America," Monatshefte 75 (1983): 242.
2. Elizabeth Bohning (University of Delaware) was the fifth woman. However, after she refused to be interviewed and expressed little interest in this dissertation I did not include her or her professional career in the examples.
3. Generally in American society there has been a contradiction between the traditional image of woman’s role as mother and wife and as a career woman. Those women who take their work seriously and who have entered traditionally male-dominated fields have often been labeled unfeminine because their careers conflict with the traditional images of the woman in society. See for example, William H. Chafe, The American Woman: Her Changing Social. Economic & Political Roles. 1920-1970. (New York: Oxford UP, 1974): 99; Geraldine Hammond, "And What of Young Women?" AAUP Bulletin 33 (1947): 299.
4. "Introduction," Lone Vovagers: Academic Women in Coeducational Universities. 1870-1937. ed. Geraldine Jongich Clifford (New York: Feminist, 1989): 11.
5. Lawrence R. Veysey, The Emergence of the American University (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1965): 272.
6. Thomas Woody, A History of Women’s Education in the United States (New York: Science, 1929): 333.
7. Often graduate schools placed quotas on the number of women who could be admitted.
8. The belief that because of a woman’s "innate female qualities"—tact, gentleness, sensitivity, emotionalism, empathy, dependence, and compliance—made them superior teachers for younger students prevailed well into the twentieth century. See for example, Woody, p. 464; Joan Jacobs Brumberg & Nancy Tomes, "Women in the Professions: A Research Agenda for American Historians," Reviews in American History 10 (1982): 282.
9. Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1930," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 29.
10. "Women as College Teachers," Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 146.
11. Rosalind Rosenberg, "The Limits of Access: The History of Coeducation in America," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 125. 20
12. Rosenberg, p. 125.
13. Clifford, p. 28.
14. Those women who were on the national AAUP council included: Lucy M. Salmon, Vassar (1920); Ellen C. Hinsdale, Mt. Holyoke (1920); Marian P. Whitney, Vassar (1921-22, 1926); Mary W. Calkins, Wellesley (1925); Eunice M. Schenk, Bryn Mawr (1926-29); Katherine Gallagher, Goucher (1927-29); Elizabeth R. Laird, Mt. Holyoke (1928-30). Those who acted as committee heads: Florence Bascomb, Bryn Mawr (1921-25); Lucille Eaves, Simmons (1922-30); Marian P. Whitney (1929-30). Marian P. Whitney and Mary W. Calkins served as national vice-presidents.
15. See for example, "AAUP Preliminary Report of the Status of Women," Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 7 (1921): 21-32; "Second Report of Committee W on the Status of Women in Colleges and University Faculties," Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 10 (1924): 563-71.
16. See for example, David M. Stameshkin, The Town’s College: Middleburv College. 1800-1915 (Middlebury VT: Middlebury College Press, 1985); Kent Sagendorph, Michigan. The Story of the University (New York: Dutton, 1948); Claude Moore Fuess, Amherst: The Storv of a New England College (Boston: Little, Brown, 1935); Walter C. Bronson, The History of Brown University. 1764-1914 (Providence, RI: Brown UP, 1914); John Viles, The University of Missouri (Columbia: U of Missouri P, 1939); Verne A. Stadtman, The University of California. 1868-1968 (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970); The Idea of the University of Chicago. Selections from the Papers of the First Eight Chief Executives of the University of Chicago from 1891 to 1975. ed. William Michael Murphy & D.J.R. Bruckner (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1976); Charles Coleman Sellers, Dickinson College. A History (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 1973); The Citv College. Memories of Sixty Years, ed. Philip J. Mosenthal & Charles F. Home (New York: Putnam, 1907); James Robert Overman, The History of Bowling Green State University (Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green UP, 1967); E.T. Nelson, Fifty Years of History of the Ohio Weslevan University. 1844- 1894 (Cleveland, OH: Cleveland Printing, 1895); Henry Clyde Hubbart, Ohio Weslevan. First Hundred Years (Ohio Wesleyan UP, 1943); Wayland Fuller Dunaway, History of Pennsylvania State College (State College: Pennsylvania State UP, 1946); James Edward Pollard, History of the Ohio State University: the Story of its First Seventv-Five Years. 1873-1948 (Columbus: Ohio State UP, 1952).
17. See for example, Cordelia Candelaria, "Reflections on Women in the Academy," Rendezvous 1 (1978): 9-18; Patricia Albjerg Graham, "Expansion and Exclusion: A History of Women in American Higher Education," Signs 3 (1978): 759-73; Marion Kilson, "The Status of Women in Higher Education," Signs 1 21
(1976): 935-42; Patricia Hopkins Lattin, "Academic Women, Affirmative Action, and Mid-America in the Eighties," Women’s Studies International Forum 6 (1983): 223-30; Susan B. Carter, "Academic Women Revisited: An Empirical Study of Changing Patterns in Women’s Employment as College and University Faculty, 1890-1963," Journal of Social History 14 (1981): 675-99; Lilli S. Homig, "Untenured and Tenuous: The Status of Women Faculty," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 448 (1980): 115-25; Myra H. Strober and David B. Tyack, "Why do Women Teach and Men Manage? A Report on Research on Schools," Signs 5 (1980): 494-503; Carol VanAlstyne, Julie S. Withers & Sharon A. Elliott, "Affirmative Inaction: The Bottom Line Tells the Tale," Change 9 (1977): 39-43.
18. See for example, Nan Bauer Maglin, "Vida to Florence: ’Comrade and Companion’," Frontiers 4 (1979): 13-20; Kathryn Kish Sklar, Catherine Beecher: A Study in American Domesticity (New Haven: Yale UP, 1973); Maris A. Vinovskis & Richard M. Bernard, "Beyond Catherine Beecher: Female Education in the Antebellum Period," Signs 3 (1978): 856-69; Elizabeth Alden Green, Marv Lvon and Mount Holvoke: Opening the Gates. (1979); Anna Mary Wells, Miss Marks and Miss Woolev (1978); Mary J. Oates and Susan Williamson, "Women’s Colleges and Women Achievers," Signs 3 (1978): 795-806; Patricia A. Palmieri, "Here Was Fellowship: A Social Portrait of Academic Women at Wellesley College, 1895-1920," History of Education Quarterly 23 (1983): 195-214; Kathryn Kish Sklar, "The Founding of Mount Holyoke College," Women of America: A History, ed. Carol Ruth Berkin & Maiy Beth Norton (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979): 177-201; Beverly Bartow, "Isabel Bevier at the University of Illinois and the Home Economics Movement," Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 72 (1979): 21-38; Estelle Pau On Lau, "Ellen Sabin and the Founding of Milwaukee- Downer College," Old Northwest 3 (1977): 39-50; Susan Margot Smith, "Ada Comstock Notestein, Educator," Women of Minnesota: Selected Biographical Essays, ed. Barbara Stuhler & Gretchen Kreuter (St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1977): 208-25; Florence Converse, The Storv of Wellesley (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1915).
19. Margaret Gordon & Clark Kerr, "University Behavior and Policies: Where are the Women and Why?," The Higher Education of Women. Essays in Honor of Rosemary Park, ed. Helen S. Astin & Werner Z. Hirsch (New York: Praeger, 1978): 113.
20. "The Teaching of German in the United States from Colonial Times to the Present," Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages (New York: MLA, 1961): 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 15-54. 22
21. Thomas R. Price, "The New Function of Modem Language Teaching," PMLA 16 (1901): 82. See also Oliver Farrar Emerson, "The Chairman’s Address, 14th Annual Meeting of the Central Division of the Association," PMLA 24 (1909): lxxiii-cii.
22. Thomas Bertrand Bronson, "The Modem Side in College," Educational Review 8 (1894): 153.
23. "Introduction," Lone Vovaeers: Academic Women in Coeducational Universities. 1870-1937. ed. Geraldine Jongich Clifford (New York: Feminist, 1989): 1-46.
24. Florence Howe, "A Report on Women and the Profession," College English 32 (1971): 850.
25. See for example Lucille Addison Pollard, Women on College and University Faculties (New York: Amo, 1977): 41; B.C. Freeman, "Faculty Women in the American University: Up the Down Staircase," Comparative Perspectives on the Academic Marketplace, ed. Philip G. Altbach (New York: Praeger, 1977): 176; S.D. Feldman, Escape From the Doll’s House: Women in Graduate and Professional School Education (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974): 43; Tessa Blackstone & O. Fulton, "Men and Women Academica: An Anglo-American Comparison of Subject Choices and Research Activity," Higher Education 3 (1974): 126.
26. Bernard, Academic Women (University Park: Penn State UP, 1964): 125.
27. Jeannine Blackwell, "Domesticating the Revolution: The Kindergarten Movement in Germany and America," Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F. W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 99-119.
28. Although the number of women in Germanics presenting papers at the annual MLA convention seems quite small, one must bear in mind that, in general, the percentage of papers given in German was also low. The average number of papers presented on German languages or literature any given year, (1919-49), was nineteen.
29. Geraldine Jongich Clifford, "Women’s Liberation and Women’s Professions: Reconsidering the Past, Present, and Future," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 173. 23
30. Lilian Stroebe, "Marian P. Whitney. In Memoriam," Monatshefte 38 (1945/46): 373.
31. "Korrespondenzen," Monatshefte 21 (1929): 18.
32. Helen Adolf Festschrift (New York: Ungar, 1968): 7.
33. Kurt Fickert, professor emeritus of German, Wittenberg University, letter to author, 18 November 1988.
34. Helene Zimmer-Loew, Executive Director of the AATG, letter to author, 8 December 1989.
35. "Interview with Hermann J. Weigand (1892-1985)," Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F. W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 285-92.
36. Although women were not actually barred from college and university teaching, it was difficult for them, because of prejudices, to gain access to the male-dominated faculties. Once women were able to eliminate the question of their intellectual abilities, at least one obstacle was eliminated. See for example, Clifford Lone Vovagers. pp. 23-25; Woody, pp. 327-28.
37. Barbara Sicherman, "College and Careers: Historical Perspectives on the Lives and Work Patterns of Women College Graduates," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 161.
38. Jeannine Blackwell, "Turf Management or Why is the Great Tradition Fading?" Monatshefte 77 (1985): 271-85; Valters Nollendorfs & Carol Amess, "Graduate Programs: Looking toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 311-31; Peter A. Eddy, "Present Status of Foreign Language Teaching: A Northeast Conference Survey," Our Profession: Present Status and Future Directions, ed. Thomas H. Geno (Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference, 1980: 13-59; German Studies and Women’s Studies: New Directions in Literary and Interdisciplinary Course Approaches, ed. Sidonie Cassirer & Sydna Stem Weiss (South Hadley, MA: Coalition of Women in German 1983); Susan Pentlin, "Women as Foreign Language Educators, 1920-1960," unpublished paper. CHAPTER II
STATE OF RESEARCH
The history of academe and that of many universities has been considered a worthy scholarly endeavor for years. But only recently have American Germanists begun to focus on their own history to further self-assessment and increase self-awareness.
Until quite recently, it appeared, members of the profession were not interested in establishing or writing the history of American Germanics. Studies have, in fact, been quite numerous given the relatively brief existence of American
Germanics. The studies which have been done however, have been disparate and normally have appeared in relative proximity to one another so that the years between their appearances seemed devoid of ongoing interest. However, the historical aspects of the German profession in America have been addressed in
Edwin Zeydel’s article, "The Teaching of German in the United States from
Colonial Times to the Present,"1 in dissertations by Richard Spuler and Magda
Lauwers-Rech,2 in a volume of essays German Studies in the United States.
Assessment and Outlook edited by Walter F. W. Lohnes and Valters Nollendorfs,3 in the Fall 1983 issue of Monatshefte and in other individual issues of this periodical, in Deutsche Snrache und Germanistik in den Vereinieten Staaten von 25 Amerika.4 at symposia at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the MLA convention in 1983, and most recently in Teaching German in the United States:
Prolegomena to a History, edited by David P. Benseler, Valters Nollendorfs, and
Walter F. W. Lohnes.5
German Studies in the United States. Assessment and Outlook is the result of several meetings by members of the profession who sought to find solutions to some of the problems—decline of language requirements, define and correct the weaknesses in current programs, low enrollment, need to define the specific role of
American Germanics—confronting the profession in the early 1970s. According to the editors (p.4) the purpose of the anthology is:
(1) To assess the German-teaching profession in the United States in its full context-from primary to graduate school: its raison d’etre in the present academic, social, and cultural situation; its structures, programs, and aims; and the people through whom and for whom it functions. (2) To offer strategies for survival and suggestions for self-improvement during the lean years ahead when our well-being and growth will not be able to rely on the benevolence of others but only on our own ingenuity, perseverance, and self- sufficiency.
Each essay in the volume discusses on some aspect of the German teaching profession from discussing different models of foreign language study and organizational structures of the profession to career alternatives for students and future options. 26
A panel discussion entitled "Prolegomena to a History of the Study of
German in the United States" took place at the 1982 MLA meeting and investigated the history of German studies. The papers from this panel subsequently appeared in Monatshefte in 1983.6 Articles written by Victor Lange, Egon Schwarz, Henry
Schmidt, and Valters Nollendorfs discuss rationales for an interpretation and history of the German teaching profession in America. In addition, each scholar outlines certain aspects of that history and raises pertinent questions concerning the role of the German profession in the United States. Lange’s article, "The History of
German Studies in America: Ends and Means," is a short survey. Lange argues for a "history of the changing function of German studies within American educational presuppositions, of the targets which German studies in America have customarily set for themselves, of the relationship between the learning of language and the appreciation of literature, and ultimately, of the interpretation of one culture to another. "7 In "Methodological Approaches to a History of German Studies in the
United States" Egon Schwarz outlines three approaches which he feels will give direction to a history of German studies: genetic (including the historical origins of institutions and personal histories), ideological (referring to the ideology expressed by the profession in professional journals and textbooks), and comparative (calling for a comparison between the American approach to Germanics and other countries’ approaches). Valters Nollendorfs ("Practical Approaches to a History of German
Studies in America") suggests sources for documentation and outlines a practical approach to collecting data. Henry Schmidt ("Rationales and Sources for a History 27 of German Studies in the United States") argues for an investigation into professional journals, textbooks, literary histories, translations, and archives in order to survey subject matter that was important during a given era. All are intended to begin the difficult process of defining what the profession has been and might become. The essays provide a prescriptive analysis of what needs to be accomplished regarding the history of Germanics, yet none of the authors actually investigates or makes conclusions on any of the topics mentioned.
Deutsche Sprache und Germanistik in den Vereinieten Staaten von Amerika is a collection of some of the articles from the 1983 symposium, "Teaching German in America: The Historical Perspective," at the University of Wisconsin. The purpose of this symposium was to investigate different aspects in the development of teaching German in the United States, thus topics range from the historical role of German in public schools, colleges and universities to the situation of German in the latter part of this century, and from the problems confronted by members of the profession during World War I to their reactions to the Third Reich.
Spuler addresses the historical ramifications of the German profession. In
Germanistik in America: The Reception of German Classicism. 1870-1905 he focuses on the influence and assimilation of German Classicism by German departments between 1870 and 1905. He gives an overview of the historical growth of American Germanics and, by reviewing literary histories, evaluates the reception of German Classicism, specifically Schiller’s Wilhelm Tell, in the United
States. He concludes from the reception of Classicism that American Germanics 28 emulated German Classicism by trying to create an analogous version of the
Klassiklegende in the United States. Furthermore, he notes that, because of the relationship between German Germanistik and American Germanics Classicism, a link was formed between the two groups which sparked continuing debates over
American Germanists’ dependence on their European counterparts.
Lauwers-Rech, as Spuler before her, realizes the importance of documenting a segment of the history of the profession. Her dissertation focuses on the reaction of American Germanics to National Socialism and World War II between 1930 and
1946. She examines articles in professional journals that deal directly with political events as well as those that are concerned with the influence of National Socialism on literature. Lauwers-Rech maintains, based on her survey of articles in professional language journals, that because of the distrust of Germans and
Germany since the First World War, the response from members of the professional organizations and journal editors to political events surrounding World
War II was one of silence.
Henry J. Schmidt’s article "What is Oppositional Criticism? Politics and
German Literary Criticism from Fascism to the Cold War, "8 outlines the critical theories that dominated West German and American Germanics during and after
World War II and discusses professional trends in the 1950s and 1960s. He concludes (p. 304) that "we should continue to study how our discipline has reacted and continues to react to social and political change;" a thought that should be considered regarding women’s increased involvement in the profession. Schmidt’s 29 polemic against those who today narrowly embrace teaching only the German classics was criticized by William Rey who defends the legitimacy of the traditional
Classical Humanism.9 However, Rey misinterprets Schmidt who does not disregard Classicism, but notes the need to discuss in addition the links between literary criticism and current social concerns.
The most recent historical publication on the profession is Teaching German in America: Prolegomena to a History (1988). This collection of essays is the first anthology devoted consciously and with determination to historical aspects of the
German teaching profession. Many of the essays were first presented at a symposium on the profession at the University of Wisconsin in 1983. Articles on the history of teaching German (documenting the very beginnings to the mid twentieth century of German teaching in the United States) as well as histories of individual departments are included. In addition, the editors point out many desiderata in this area; biographies, oral interviews, complete bibliographical information on the teaching of German, listings of relevant archival material, and critical histories of professional journals and organizations.10
The annual "Personalia" lists and the DAAD/Monatshefte Directory should also be mentioned here as they share a purpose with other works already mentioned. The "Personalia" lists, published annually in Monatshefte beginning in
1938/39, are a selective faculty directory of American Germanists. The lists are, for the most part, incomplete as they include only those institutions/departments which respond to an annual survey. The "Personalia" lists generally provide only 30 information on currently employed faculty and emeriti—full and part-time—however, the lists also group faculty according to academic rank. The
"Personalia" listings, particularly the early ones, are the only available published attempt at a database for gathering information on faculty in Germanics prior to the publication of the DAAD/Monatshefte Directory. Originally published in 1980, revised in 1985 and again in 1991, the Directory is a detailed compilation of
German departments and faculties.11 More elaborate than the annual "Personalia" issue of Monatshefte. it includes information on each listed person’s scholarly interests, awards, committees, research, teaching, and degrees. The editor cites two purposes for this Directory: first, "for others and ourselves to find out where we are, who we are, and what we do" (xiii); second, to begin a cataloguing of the profession and to increase its self-awareness in the United States while leading "to further self-assessment and, eventually, self-improvement" (xiii). Both directories are important for this study because they list each individual faculty member separately, which allowed me to compile percentages on women faculty which otherwise could not have been done.
The history of the teaching of German has doubtless been more fully researched than have other areas in American Germanics.12 In his account of the profession (1961), "The Teaching of German in the United States from Colonial
Times to the Present"13 Edwin Zeydel cites as his sources and gives information about several previous works: Charles Hart Handschin’s "The Teaching of the
Modem Languages in the United States,"14 E. W. Bagster-Collins’ "History of 31
Modem Language Teaching, Reports Prepared for the Modem Foreign Language
Study and the Canadian Committee on Modem Languages,1,15 and Louis
Viereck’s "German Instruction in American Schools," a work which deals more specifically with the teaching of German.16 Zeydel gives a brief discussion of
(p. 317) German textbooks which display "prevailing methods of teaching, choice and presentation of material, and many other imponderables," and presents valuable information on the founding of such organizations as the Nationaler Deutsch-
Amerikanischer Lehrerbund (1870), the Modem Language Association (1883), the
American Association of Teachers of German (1926); the beginnings of three professional journals, Modem Language Notes. Americana-Germanica. and the
Journal of English and Germanic Philology, the impact on language teaching of
America’s hysteria about and resultant propaganda against Germany, Germans, and the German language following the outbreak of World War I; and the boom in modem language study during the 1950s. His work focuses as well on the development of various teaching methods: from the traditional method which
centered on grammar, reading, and translation, to then more sophisticated ones in
the area of audio-lingualism.
Each of the works mentioned emphasizes some aspect of the history of
Germanics in the United States, but none directly discuss the roles and contributions
of women in our professional history. Further investigations such as those by
Thomas Woody, Marion Hawthorne and others explore historical aspects of women 32 in higher education and assess the exclusion and differential treatment of women by and in American institutions.
Woody’s major work, History of Women’s Education in the United States, was published in 1929.17 In general the rapid expansion of educational facilities in the late 19th century, i.e. the advent of co-educational institutions and the expansion of post-graduate work in older universities, forced the academic community to take note of a potential professional role for women. Women had early on been able to teach at grammar and secondary schools, however they were not really welcome in the higher branches of the teaching profession.18 Woody cites two reasons for this exclusion: most women lacked college training for higher posts and male dominated university faculties were loath to admit them.19 In a passage from the 1921 Report of the American Association of University Professors many AAUP members maintain: "When we discover a woman who can handle some subject in our course of study better than a man could handle it, we shall not hesitate to urge the appointment of the woman...."20 It is quite apparent from this statement that women were expected to be better than their male counterparts in order to gain an academic appointment. This bias, however, was known to most academic women.
In her survey of women college teachers, Marion Hawthorne writes; "Women with exceptional ability and proper influence testify to the fact that they were able to rise
to a position equal to that of male colleagues, but the rank and file of the
respondents seem to have developed a defensive attitude bordering on martyrdom,
and complained, waxed bitter, and voiced resentment toward the conditions of 33 which they were victims." (p. 153) The AAUP statement implied incompetence, but Woody indicates prejudice, rather than incompetence, as the reason women received fewer faculty appointments than did males. In fact, he concludes (p. 324), women enter professorships infrequently at universities, their promotion is slower, and rank and salary are generally lower than those of men.
Mabel Newcomer’s A Century of Higher Education for American Women provides a new perspective on the development of higher education for women.21
She points out that the scholarship prior to 1959 was mainly in the form of histories of individual colleges or analyses of women’s roles in society after college.22 In contrast, she investigates specific questions: what women chose to study; what they have done with their education; what kind of women go to college; what their contributions to society and to the development of education have been. Most importantly, she asks what role women’s colleges have played in the overall history of women’s education. Newcomer concludes that although women’s right to higher education is now accepted, women were not keeping pace academically with men and theorizes that American society (during the 1950s at least) did not encourage women to pursue a college education.
Jessie Bernard’s focal point in Academic Women is career patterns, which she traces from their promising beginnings in the late nineteenth century to the period between 1930 and 1960, a period she refers to as the "Great
Withdrawal."23 Bernard concludes that women PhDs tend to be associated with low-prestige institutions and to be less productive than men, especially when 34 productivity is measured in terms of published work. She concludes that women’s productivity is affected by marriage and children. Her question; "How many more articles would a woman produce if she had not produced a child?" (p. 154) remains unanswered.
In "Expansion and Exclusion: A History of Women in American Higher
Education," Patricia Graham examines the historical character of higher education emphasizing changes in women’s societal roles as major factors affecting their role and participation in academe.24 Graham divides her history into three periods to represent the evolution of American higher education from an elite educational program to one in the mainstream of American education and accessible to all: from around 1636 (the founding of Harvard) to 1870, 1870-1925, and 1925 to the present. Colleges of the first period were homogeneous, outside the mainstream of
American life, and dedicated to giving sons of wealthy families a classical education. The second period marked critical decades for women in higher education. New institutions, land grant colleges and normal schools "based on differing organizational principles and directed toward differing educational goals" broke with earlier ideals of a classical education.25 These new colleges—Iowa
State, Cornell, the University of Kentucky, Rutgers, Pennsylvania State, to name only a few—not only expanded the curricula to include subjects such as agriculture, engineering, and home economics, but also began hiring more women as faculty members.26 These institutions, because of their willingness to innovate, aided women’s advancement and marked their entry into the academic profession. The 35 third period is highlighted by the beginnings and institutionalization of the research university. The growth of research produced basic changes in American higher education, alterations which impacted women directly and indirectly. "A direct result was that institutions traditionally based on other standards had to choose between emulating the now almost universal model or resign themselves to providing alternatives without widespread public and professional support. An indirect result was that those categories of people, particularly women, who had not earlier won secure places for themselves in society and were now continuing to try to do so, faced a dwindling number of accepted educational pathways (761)."
Thus, according to Graham, the development of the research university, the attempt of other institutions to imitate this model, and the lack of "secure" jobs severely limited women’s function in academe or excluded them altogether from the academic profession.
Emily Abel’s book, Terminal Degrees: Job Crisis in Higher Education, documents the deterioration of the job market in higher education compared to the number of qualified candidates produced.27 She analyses academic employment in the humanities and social sciences, emphasizing interviews with academics who have either failed to secure appointments or promotions or who have been denied tenure. Her rationale (p. 11) behind the interviewing process is "to discuss aspects of their [displaced academics] lives that cannot easily be quantified." Included with these interviews are data on faculty employment, conditions of part-time 36 employment, who makes up that labor force, possibilities for taking action, and practical solutions to the academic job crisis in the United States.
In 1971 and 1976 the MLA’s Commission on the Status of Women in the
Profession provided results of two nationwide surveys on women in English and modem language departments.28 Essentially the studies focused on the types of appointments, rank, teaching patterns, salary levels, the proportion of women among graduate student enrollment and degrees conferred, and nepotism regulations. From the studies one may conclude that: 1) most women in the modem language profession find themselves in less "prestigious" institutions; 2) most are teaching only first and second year courses; 3) most women are at four year colleges, where teaching loads are heavy and time for research and writing is at a premium; 4) cultural myths, for instance that a "woman’s place" is in the home, have discouraged many from pursuit of their careers; 5) at each stage of the professional ladder, from graduate student to full professor, women are found in decreasing numbers; 6) in doctoral degree granting institutions, women are generally underrepresented in the upper ranks of the professoriate.
In a survey of graduate programs in German, Nollendorfs and Amess
conclude that the number of women enrolled in graduate programs from 1976 to
1984 and that the number of women obtaining the doctorate had risen.29 Yet little
overall change can be claimed in the demand for or integration of these women into
departments. Most women tend to be employed in temporary and non-tenure track
positions. "Personalia" statistics collected from 1981/82 to 1984/85 show that, 37 although well over half of doctorates were awarded to women (Table 1 p. 37), the percentage of females hired into temporary positions was substantially higher than those hired to permanent ones. In addition the percentage of women already in the professoriate who held tenured appointments was lower than those who held untenured and other appointments (Table 2 p. 37).30
/
Table 1: Male/Female Distribution of Doctorates, 1981-8531
Male Female Total % Female
1980/81 38 53 91 58
1981/82 29 42 71 59
1982/83 33 51 84 61
1983/84 40 44 84 52
Table 2: Percentage of Women Faculty, 1981-8532
% of Women in Ranks % of New Appointments
Tenured Untenured Other Permanent Temporary
1981/83 18 39 65 35 78
1982/83 20 39 69 44 62
1983/84 20 47 67 59 62
1984/85 20 45 71 39 69
Nollendorfs and Amess cite several reasons (pp. 329-30) why women might not
obtain or even seek permanent positions: 1) their traditional roles as wife and
mother; 2) less mobility than male counterparts and greater willingness to tolerate
temporary jobs; 3) male faculty members’ traditional discrimination and biases
against women. 38
Jeannine Blackwell discusses a similar problem in "Turf Management or
Why is the Great Tradition Fading?"33 She addresses (271) "the shape of German faculties, and the effects of demographics on the intellectual health of future
German scholars." Blackwell creates a fictional "average German department" based on 1984 figures from Monatshefte surveys and reports on the status of higher education.34 In profiling the "average German department, she points to the current and future problems of departments that are becoming feminized and urbanized. Because of a then decline in total number of graduate students in
German, graduate students tend to go to the top degree-producing universities.
Although these institutions are producing future faculty, they tend to promote a smaller percentage of new faculty compared to other institutions. Blackwell suggests broadening the traditional approach to German to one which can include
German in combination with women’s studies, computer science, or business so that the diversity in the profession and in higher education itself is met.
Historical evaluations of the German profession are becoming more frequent and more important. In general the significance of historical evaluations for any profession is to examine past trends and increase awareness of how the profession should function, now and in the future. Because the field is, relative to higher education in general, still quite new, much research needs to be done in all areas.
As historical publications continue, the awareness of the profession will grow.
Valters Nollendorfs states: "Historical self-awareness helps define a profession from
within and without.1,35 39
1. Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages (New York: MLA, 1961): 285-308; rpt. in German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 15-54.
2. Lauwers-Rech, "The Influence of Nazism and World War II on German Studies in the United States," DAI 46 (1986): 3730A (Ohio State U); Spuler "Germanistik" in America: The Reception of German Classicism, 1870-1905," Diss. Ohio State U, 1981; Stuttgarter Arbeiten zur Germanistik 115 (Stuttgart: Heinz, 1982).
3. (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1976).
4. Zeitschrift fur Kulturaustausch 2 (1985): 167-292.
5. (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988).
6. Lange, pp. 245-56; Schwarz, pp. 257-59; Schmidt, pp. 260-65; Nollendorfs, pp. 266-70.
7. Lange, p. 255.
8. Monatshefte 79 (1987): 292-307.
9. William H. Rey, "Colloquium: Oskar Seidlin and ’Oppositional Critisicm,’" Monatshefte 80 (1988): 297-99; Henry J. Schmidt, "Response to Willian H. Rey’s ’Offener Brief,’" Monatshefte 80 (1988): 299-301.
10. See the introduction to Teaching German in America: Prolegomena to a History: xi-xiv.
11. Directory of German Departments. German Studies Faculties and Programs in the United States, ed. Valters Nollendorfs with Karl F. Markgraf (New York: DAAD, 1986).
12. See for example John A. Walz, German Influence in American Education and Culture (Philadelphia: Carl Schurz Memorial Foundation, 1936); Peter Hagboldt, The Teaching of German (Boston: Heath, 1940); Twentieth Century Modem Language Teaching: Sources and Readings, ed. Maxim Newmark (New York: Philosophical Library, 1948); L.G. Kelly, 25 Centuries of Language Teaching (Rowley, MA: Newbury, 1969); Hugo Schmidt, "A Historical Survey of the Teaching of German in America," The Teaching of German: Problems and Methods, ed. Eberhard Reichmann (Philadelphia: NCSA, 1970): 3-7; and Susan 40
Pentlin, "Effect of the Third Reich on the Teaching of German in the United States: a Historical Study," Diss., U of Kansas, 1977.
13. Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages (New York: MLA, 1961): 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 15-54.
14. US Bureau of Education Bulletin 3. (Washington DC: GPO, 1913): 1- 191.
15. Studies in Modem Language Teaching (New York: McMillan, 1930): 3- 96.
16. "German Instruction in American Schools," US Bureau of Education. Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1900-1901 (Washington: GPO, 1902): 531-708.
17. (New York: Science, 1929).
18. Woody, p. 324. See also Joan Jacobs Brumberg & Nancy Tomes, "Women in the Professions: A Research Agenda for American Historians," Reviews in American History 10 (1982): 278; Marion O. Hawthorne, "Women as College Teachers," Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 146; Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1933," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 29; Rosalind Rosenberg, "The Limits of Access: The History of Coeducation in America," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher and Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 125-26.
19. Woody, p. 324.
20. AAUP 1921 Bulletin VII, quoted in Woody, p. 329.
21. (New York: Harper & Row, 1959).
22. One work she mentions is Woody’s A History of Women’s Education in the United States (New York: Science Press, 1929).
23. Bernard (University Park: Penn State UP, 1964).
24. Signs 3 (1978): 759-73.
25. Graham, p. 761. 41
26. According to data (p. 680) collected by Susan Carter, "Academic Women Revisited: An Empirical Study of Changing Patterns in Women’s Employment as College and University Faculty, 1890-1963," Journal of Social History 14 (1981): 675-91, women comprised the following proportions of faculty in all-white land-grant institutions: 1890 three and a half percent; 1900 almost eight percent (7.9); 1910 nine percent; 1920 fourteen percent; 1930 seventeen percent.
27. (New York: Praeger, 1984).
28. Joan E. Hartman, et al, "Study III - Women in Modem Language Departments 1972-73: A Report by the Commission on the Status of Women in the Profession," PMLA 91 (1976): 124-36.; Florence Howe, et al, "The Status of Women in Modem Language Departments: A Report of the Modem Language Association Commission on the Status of Women in the Profession," PMLA 86 (1971): 459-61.
29. Valters Nollendorfs & Carol Amess, "Graduate Programs: Looking Toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 311-31.
30. See also Jeannine Blackwell, "Turf Management or Why is the Great Tradition Fading?," Monatshefte 77 (1985): 272; and Minorities and Women in Higher Education (Washington: EEOC, 1983): 1-3; 7; 12A.
31. adapted from Nollendorfs & Amess, p. 328.
32. adapted from Nollendorfs & Amess, p. 329.
33. Blackwell, Monatshefte 77 (1985): 271-85.
34. Blackwell cites as her sources, "Personalia," Monatshefte (1984): 307- 10; Nollendorfs & Amess, "Graduate Programs: Looking toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 311-31; "The Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession 1983-84," Academe 70 (1984), particularly "Weighted Average Salary for Men and Women Faculty by Category, Type of Affiliation, Academic Rank, and Sex, 1983-84": 12.
35. Nollendorfs, "History of Teaching German in America," Monatshefte 79 (1987): 290. CHAPTER III
PUBLICATION ACTIVITY OF WOMEN GERMANISTS
Scholarly publications are probably easier to evaluate in the academic profession than is the quantity of a faculty member’s other functions—teaching and service. Although the number and quality of publications are not, nor should they be, the only measure of a satisfying academic career, they are a visible register of scholarly achievement. While research activity is important, it is only one aspect of an academic career and its level of relative importance is generally determined
(excluding personal preference) by the goals of the institution in which one is employed. Doctoral institutions weigh research more heavily and small liberal arts colleges the least, since student contact and nurturing are more important in the latter than they are in the former. Publication and research are, therefore, evaluated here as a complementary aspect to teaching activities and responsibilities in professional organizations.
This chapter investigates the publication productivity of women in
Germanics by examining the contents of six professional language journals. Its purpose is to establish the percentage of articles published by women in Germanics and to compare their rate of publication with that of their male counterparts. In addition, the present chapter evaluates the types of articles published by women in
42 43 order to establish the areas in which they publish the most. Finally, I review research contributions based on the individual bibliographies of four women. These individual bibliographies are lengthy and are not representative of the entire profession. However, because of the quantity of material published and the broad range of subjects covered by these four individuals, it becomes apparent that a number of women were part of a small group of leaders whose scholarship influenced the profession.
In most academic environments in the United States, published research is generally regarded as a sure route to academic advancement. While teaching took precedence over research during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and early nineteenth centuries in the United States, the passage of the Morrill Act in 1862 brought about two specific changes regarding the function of the American college professor. The
first was a decline in the character-building role of the college, thus the professor’s
role concentrated on imparting information, rather than supervising character
development.1 The second change is seen in the increased importance given to
research and publication as "the marks of professional success and as the road to
promotion and advancement."2 Whether an individual has scholarly potential has
now become a factor when applying for an academic position. For example,
Nollendorfs and Amess point out: "Qualities that reflect on good teaching
performance, including linguistic fluency and energy/enthusiasm are also high on
this list of desiderata [for job applicants], although fewer departments require their
interviewees to teach than to present a paper when they visit on campus."3 Publications, then, have been and are used to measure scholarly ability and are a basis for promotion and financial reward. This emphasis on research and publications has had a tremendous impact on all women pursuing an academic career. Not only were women often expected to perform (i.e. teach) better than their male counterparts to gain an initial academic appointment,4 they were also required to publish as widely as their male counterparts before receiving higher appointments. In 1947, for example, Geraldine Hammond commented that the only way a woman could be considered for academic promotion was if she became renowned (i.e. well published): "No matter how good a teacher she has become, unless she has also become famous, and I use the word advisedly, she will not receive offers of professorships or even associate or assistant professorships from other schools.... She can keep on being a good teacher; she can also write a book.
In her case scholarship and production are not only advisable; they are necessary if she is to expect any great degree of academic and financial advancement. "5
Although promotional decisions are likely based on publication records because publications are more observable and quantitative than teaching accomplishments, according to a 1963 U.S. Office of Education survey, ninety-seven percent of faculty in all foreign languages and literatures (ninety-eight percent of German faculty) listed their career intent as teaching.6 Paul Morrill and Emil Spees
(p. 168) point out: "(d)ecisions on promotion and tenure have more often rested on the research record (i.e., publication] record of the faculty member) than on any systematic evaluation of its quality or the quality of other functions of the academic 45 professor.... "7 Consequently Michael Brookes and Katherine German conclude, although ".. .most faculty spend their time teaching and describe themselves as teachers, they place a higher value on research than they place on teaching. "8
In recent years several studies have analyzed publication productivity of women in academe.9 Focussing on cumulative production or publication rate, all conclude that women publish less than men. Several reasons have been advanced in attempts to account for an apparently lower level of scholarly productivity among women in comparison to their male counterparts. Women have: 1) more career interruptions due to marriage and/or family responsibilities;10 2) lower degree attainment; 3) lesser ranking and institutional affiliation;11 4) a greater preference for teaching.12 Moreover, women may suffer possible gender bias on the part of editors and editorial boards in the selection of journal articles—which provided the rationale for most modem language journals to convert to anonymous submission policies—and they may feel isolated from traditional departmental and/or professional networks.13 The studies agree that, although women tend to publish fewer books and articles, results vary when certain factors, such as academic discipline, doctoral institution, rank, institutional affiliation, and length of career are taken into account. Implied is that if enough variables are controlled, specifically rank, institutional affiliation, and career length, the publication rate between men and women would be comparable. The Carnegie-American Council on Education Faculty finds "publication disparity declining as faculty ascended the hierarchy of academic ranks. With increasing rank, the proportion of female ’inactives’ declined, approaching parity with males at the full-professor level; and the proportion of moderate female publishers substantially increased."14 However, even in highly controlled analyses, results showed that women continued to be less productive.15 Results from my controlled survey discussed in this chapter of women’s publication productivity in Germanics were similar to the overall trends indicated in previous studies.
Although scholarly books, textbooks, reviews, and professional conference papers could all be used to gauge scholarly productivity, articles appearing in professional language and literature journals have been chosen as the sole component for this study. Journals are a current and public source demonstrating the literary, methodological, and cultural trends in a profession. Although
Germanists publish in many different professional and/or scholarly journals, this survey is limited to those journals which are either official publications of a language organization, or more mainstream language and literature journals which historically have published a large number of articles on Germanics. The official journals of language organizations were chosen because they represent the character of an organization, and, by analogy, of the profession, by publishing meeting minutes, debates, policy decisions, and by sponsoring activities. By surveying professional journals "the dominant critical methodologies of a particular era, the
accepted boundaries of scholarly research, and the contours of prevailing literary canon" can be gathered.16 Moreover, the quality and contribution of a publication
are quite difficult to measure. Previous studies dealing with scholarly productivity 47
generally evaluate quantity, rather than quality. That an article appeared in a professional journal is an indication that it met minimum publication standards set by the editor, the editorial board, and/or the sponsoring professional or scholarly
organization which owns the journal.17 Therefore the articles assessed here have
in a sense already been qualitatively evaluated even when one takes into account the
possibility of the author or the article finding favor with the members of the
editorial board and/or editor. Standards of publication between journals however,
are, at best, uneven.
Three journals—Monatshefte, The German Quarterly and The Germanic
Review—were chosen as a foundation for the present study because they publish
exclusively on German language, literature, and culture, and the teaching of them.
Monatshefte (founded in 1894) was the official organ of the Nationale
Deutschamerikanische Lehrerbund until 1928 when the Lehrerbund was dissolved.
Afterwards it was edited at the University of Wisconsin by Max Griebsch.
Monatshefte was originally devoted to the teaching of German in schools and
colleges.
The German Quarterly (GO: 1928), the official journal of the American
Association of Teachers of German (AATG), describes its primary function as
being "helpful in solving the problems of the classroom ... to secure contributions
that look beyond mere technique-broader questions of policy and organization of
German instruction."18 This statement of editorial policy was later modified when
the Unterrichtspraxis (UP) was established in 1968. 48
The Germanic Review (GR: 1926), edited by members of the Department of
Germanic Languages at Columbia University, prints exclusively interpretive scholarly analyses of German literature and culture. "The editors believe that the
Germanic languages form a unified and clearly defined field of research deserving a periodical which shall devote itself to this field alone."19
Three additional journals—the Publications of the Modem Language
Association (PMLA; 1884), the Journal of English and Germanic Philology (JEGP:
1899) and The Modem Language Journal (MLJ: 1916)—were also chosen because they too are concerned with pedagogical and literary aspects of modem languages and thus enable us to look at publication outlets in all spheres of the activities of
American Germanists. No available records indicate the number of articles submitted by women to a journal. Therefore, my analysis is necessarily limited to published articles.
In order for the percentages of articles authored by women Germanists to be meaningful, the percentage of female Germanists at American universities needs to be determined. The only faculty statistics available for the years 1888-1949 are in
United States Statistical Abstracts. However those figures provide data only on the distribution of female faculty allfor disciplines combined. David P. Benseler’s as yet unpublished bibliography, "A Comprehensive Bibliography of American
Doctoral Dissertations on Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, 1861-1972," provides figures for the number of women who received doctoral degrees from
1861 through 1972, though it does not indicate whether these women were later 49 employed on college or university faculties. Therefore, in order to estimate the ratio of employed female Germanists, "Personalia" listings from Monatshefte were surveyed. Since publication of the annual "Personalia" directory began only in
1938/39, the estimated percentage of female Germanists is based on the directories published between 1938-39 and 1948-49. I took each annual "Personalia" directory and determined which institutions responded regularly (i.e. at least nine out of the ten year period). I then calculated the total number of full-time faculty and the number of female full-time faculty during each academic year. From these figures
I was able to calculate a percentage for female Germanists for the ten year period
(Table 3 pp. 50-56). Although the "Personalia" lists are flawed—as they record only those departments which actually respond to an annual survey—they represent the only available data on the number of Germanists employed at American colleges and universities. Moreover, there will always exist the possibility that an individual, either male or female, will be counted more than once in faculty registers. Obviously these lists contain information only from the colleges and universities that responded, but because the figures represent a mean percentage, it is reasonable to assume that the percentage of female Germanists will be the same between responding and non-responding schools. Results show that the average percentage of women faculty in German between 1939 and 1949 was seventeen percent. Table 3: Faculty and Women Faculty in German, Totals at Select Universities, 1938-39 through 1948-49
1938/39 1939/40 1940/41 1941/42 1942/43 1943/44 School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Univ. of n/a n/a 3 0 3 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 Arizona
Bryn Mawr 3 2 4 2 6 3 6 3 4 2 5 4
Univ. Buffalo n/a n/a 4 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 1 Berkeley 12 1 12 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 0 UCLA 11 0 12 0 11 0 9 0 9 0 8 1 Univ. 11 2 7 0 6 1 6 1 6 1 7 2 Chicago
Univ. 7 1 6 1 5 0 4 0 4 0 5 2 Cincinnati
Univ. n/a n/a 4 1 3 0 5 1 3 1 2 1 Colorado
Columbia 11 0 10 1 10 1 10 1 11 1 9 2
Duke n/a n/a 7 0 7 0 6 0 6 0 4 0
George n/a n/a 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 Washington Univ. Table 3 Continued
1938/39 1939/40 1940/41 1941/42 1942/43 1943/44
School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Harvard 17 0 7 0 7 0 9 0 10 0 4 0 Univ. Illinois 9 1 8 1 9 1 7 1 6 1 7 1 Urbana
Indiana Univ. 9 1 12 3 8 2 8 2 8 2 5 1
Iowa State 5 0 4 0 5 0 4 0 4 0 3 1 Univ.
Johns 3 0 3 0 4 0 3 0 3 0 2 0 Hopkins
Univ. Kansas n/a n/a 5 0 3 0 4 0 4 0 2 0
Univ. n/a n/a 3 0 3 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 Kentucky
Lousiana n/a n/a 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 State Univ.
Univ. n/a n/a 5 0 7 0 6 0 8 0 5 0 Maryland Table 3 Continued
1938/39 1939/40 1940/41 1941/42 1942/43 1943/44
School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Univ. 13 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 10 0 Michigan
Univ. 12 1 12 1 11 1 11 1 8 1 7 1 Minnesota
Univ. n/a n/a 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 3 1 Missouri
ML Holyoke 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 3 2 3 2
Univ. n/a n/a 5 1 5 1 5 1 4 1 4 1 Nebraska
NY City 15 0 13 0 14 0 14 0 9 0 7 0 College
Univ. North 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 6 0 5 0 Carolina
Ohio State 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 3 0
Ohio Univ. n/a n/a 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 2 0
Penn State n/a n/a 8 2 7 2 7 1 7 2 5 1 Table 3 Continued
1938/39 1939/40 1940/41 1941/42 1942/43 1943/44
School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Univ. Penn 10 0 9 0 10 0 10 0 8 0 7 0 Univ. n/a n/a 4 1 4 1 4 1 3 1 2 0 Pittsburgh
Univ. n/a u/a 7 2 7 2 6 2 7 2 4 1 Rochester
Rutgers n/a n/a 8 1 4 0 3 0 3 0 2 0
Smith 7 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 3 3 5 4 College
Stanford 7 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 7 1 6 3 Univ. Texas 7 0 7 1 7 1 7 1 5 2 5 1 Vassar 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 College
Univ. n/a n/a 5 0 5 0 5 0 4 0 4 0 Virginia
Univ. 12 1 11 2 10 1 10 1 10 1 9 4 Wisconsin
Yale 11 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 9 0 7 0 Table 3 Continued
1944/45 1945/46 1946/47 1947/48 1948/49
School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Univ. of 2 0 2 0 5 1 5 1 6 1 Arizona
Bryn Mawr 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 2 Univ. Buffalo 2 1 3 1 8 5 11 6 8 4
Berkeley 11 0 11 0 13 1 13 1 14 1 UCLA 8 0 9 0 9 1 11 1 11 0 Univ. Chicago 7 3 7 3 10 4 12 4 12 2 Univ. 4 0 3 1 7 3 8 3 7 2 Cincinnati
Univ. 2 0 3 1 9 3 10 3 8 2 Colorado
Columbia 8 1 8 1 11 1 12 2 13 2
Duke 5 0 5 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 George 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 Washington Univ.
L /l Table 3 Continued
1944/45 1945/46 1946/47 1947/48 1948/49 School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Harvard 5 0 6 0 9 0 10 0 8 0 Univ. Illinois 7 1 6 2 10 2 11 3 12 3 Urbana
Indiana Univ. 6 2 7 1 10 3 12 2 12 2
Iowa State 3 0 6 1 6 2 6 2 6 2 Univ.
Johns Hopkins 2 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 Univ. Kansas 2 0 3 0 9 4 9 3 7 2 Univ. 2 1 3 0 6 3 5 1 5 0 Kentucky
Lousiana State 3 0 4 1 6 3 6 3 5 2 Univ.
Univ. 7 0 5 0 9 0 9 1 8 1 Maryland Table 3 Continued
1944/45 1945/46 1946/47 1947/48 1948/49
School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Univ. 10 0 11 0 14 0 17 0 16 0 Michigan
Univ. 8 1 6 1 11 2 9 1 9 1 Minnesota
Univ. 3 1 3 1 6 4 9 6 7 4 Missouri
Ml Holyoke 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2
Univ. 3 0 3 0 5 2 5 2 5 2 Nebraska
NY City 8 0 8 0 11 0 14 0 15 0 College
Univ. North 3 0 4 0 8 2 11 1 6 0 Carolina
Ohio State 9 0 10 0 12 0 14 2 14 2
Ohio Univ. 2 0 2 0 3 1 4 1 4 1
Penn State 5 1 7 2 7 3 7 2 7 2
L /l o\ Table 3 Continued
1944/45 1945/46 1946/47 1947/48 1948/49
School Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women Faculty Women
Univ. Penn 7 0 8 0 14 0 12 0 11 0 Univ. 2 0 2 0 2 0 4 0 4 0 Pittsburgh
Univ. 4 1 5 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 Rochester
Rutgers 1 0 4 0 9 0 8 0 8 0 Smith College 4 4 6 5 5 4 7 5 6 4
Stanford 6 0 9 1 9 5 11 5 12 4 Univ. Texas 5 2 6 2 8 3 11 2 8 3 Vassar 5 4 6 5 n/a n/a 4 4 4 4 College
Univ. Virginia 4 0 3 0 4 0 6 0 3 0 Univ. 13 2 13 2 11 1 13 2 13 2 Wisconsin
Yale 8 0 10 0 10 0 7 0 8 0
' j 58
I tabulated the number of articles published each year beginning in 1884
(birth of PMLA) and continuing through 1949. This time frame was then divided
into seven ten year intervals to make tabulating statistics easier than would
otherwise have been the case: up to 1889, 1890-99, 1900-09, 1910-19, 1920-29,
1930-39, and 1940-49. In addition, since annual faculty listings were not published until 1938-39, it was appropriate to divide the journal data into parallel time
periods. For the German language journals—Monatshefte (MDU). The German
Quarterly (GQ) and The Germanic Review (GR)—the percentage of articles written
by women was determined in each of the ten year periods (Table 4 p. 62). These
percentages were calculated by comparing ten year totals of all articles with ten
year totals of articles authored by women. For example 302 articles were published
in Monatshefte between 1900 and 1909. Eight of those articles (2.6 percent) were
authored by women. For the modem language journals—PMLA. JEGP. MLJ—the
proportion of articles written by Germanists and other German teachers was first
calculated. Article title and content as well as the authors’ departmental affiliation
identified an article as "German." Many articles, for instance "Zur Entstehung,
Problem und Technik von Goethes ’Werther’" (Ernst Feise, JEGP 13 [1914]: 1-36)
or "The Question of the Most Economical Learning of the German Vocabulary,"
(C.H. Handschin, MLJ 17 [1932-33]: 195-200) are easily identified as pertaining to
German. Other articles however, such as "The Real Knowledge of a Foreign
Country "(Lilian Stroebe, MLJ 5 [1920-21]: 38-44) or "Modem Ideas in the Middle
Ages" (Kuno Francke, PMLA 5 [1890]: 175-84) dealing with general language and 59 literature themes were included based on closer content analysis as well as the authors’ teaching position at the time of publication.20 Therefore the percentage of
German articles authored by women is a portion of the total number of articles published in German, not of the actual article total (Table 5 p. 62). For example, between 1920 and 1929 The Journal of English and Germanic Philology published
270 articles, ninety-one of those articles were designated as German; of the ninety- one, only four (4.3 percent) were authored by women.
Table 4 (p. 62) gives article totals and shows the percentage of articles by women in journals devoted entirely to Germanics. The percentage of articles authored by women and published in Monatshefte increases to a high of 10.3 percent between 1930 and 1939, but decreases between 1940 and 1949 to 6.1 percent. The number of articles authored by women and published in The German
Quarterly decreases substantially over three decades from 15.1 percent between
1920-29 to 9.4 percent between 1940-49. Of those surveyed in Germanics, The
Germanic Review is the only periodical that shows a rise in female publication rates from 4.8 percent between 1920-29 to 7.5 percent between 1940-49. One possible reason for the increase in publications in The Germanic Review during this time was the existence of a female editor (Marie L. Hall) between 1946 and 1956. The period 1940 to 1949 depicts the most evenly distributed publication rate of articles by women between the three journals. For example between 1920 and 1929 the highest percentage of articles authored by women was 15.1 percent while the lowest was 4.8 percent. One probable reason for the dramatically higher percentage of 60 articles authored by women appearing in The German Quarterly is that the journal was still quite new and the more established members of the profession, although publishing pedagogical articles, preferred to submit papers to a well established and reputable journal, Monatshefte. The percentage gap increased during the 1940s to between 9.4 percent and 6.1 percent. The number of articles authored by women appearing in all three Germanic periodicals increased twenty-seven percent between
1920 and 1949; the total number of articles appearing in these journals at that time
increased twenty-six percent. This proportion indicates that the percentage rate for
female authors remained constant. Although the publication rate for women
remained relatively stable for several decades, articles authored by women began to
appear more frequently in a broader range of journals due in part to the increasing
number of journals publishing articles in Germanics. Although one expects the
percentage of articles by women to increase during war years when many men were
drafted into military service, the actual percentage of articles published by women
remained constant. I surveyed "Personalia" issues for 1943-44 and 1944-45 and
determined the total number of male Germanists. From that total, I determined the
number of men who were listed in military service during that academic year. The
percentage of male Germanists listed in military service then is a proportion of the
total number of male Germanists, not of the total faculty. The percentage of male
Germanists engaged in active military service was low; in 1943-44 only ten percent
of all employed male Germanists, increasing to sixteen percent in 1944-45.
Consequently, probable reasons for the stable publishing rate of women Germanists are that many male Germanists were still actively teaching and publishing even during the war years and those women who were publishing remained the same.
The average percentage of articles written by women in the German language journals surveyed during 1884-1950 is nearly seven (6.9) percent. Table 4: Article Totals for Germanic Journals, 1889-1949
Year Journal Total Number Number of Articles by Percentage of of Articles Women Articles by Women -1889 1890-1899 MDU 48 2 4.1% 1900-1909 MDU 302 8 2.6% 1910-1919 MDU 280 11 3.9%
1920-1929 MDU 140 11 7.8% GR 83 4 4.8% GQ 33 5 15.1% 1930-1939 MDU 320 33 10.3% GR 218 11 5.0% GQ 227 24 10.5%
1940-1949 MDU 407 25 6.1% GR 240 18 7.5% GQ 316 30 9.4% Table 5 (p. 65) illustrates article totals and the percentage distribution of articles in modem language periodicals. In general women in Germanics published little until around 1900. Between 1900 and 1949 the percentage rates fluctuate depending on the journal. For instance, during several decades no articles were published by women in German (-1889, 1890-99, 1900-09, 1920-29) in PMLA.
Yet between 1910 and 1949 the percentage of articles by women in PMLA increased somewhat to 4.7 (1910-19); 10.9 (1930-39); 8.8 (1940-49). Between
1900 and 1909 the proportion of articles by women Germanists in JEGP reached a high of 9.8 percent. The remaining figures for this journal dropped to 8.2 percent
(1910-19) and thereafter remained relatively stable between 1920 and 1949 except for a low of 1.6 percent between 1930 and 1939. Percentages for The Modem
Language Journal decline from 35.7 percent in 1916-19 to 20.5 percent in 1920-29 reaching a low 5.2 percent in 1940-49. The considerable decrease of articles by women in The Modem Language Journal could be due to the general increase in literary articles which were more often published in other language journals. One could speculate that increased marriage rates may also indicate that women were no longer as active in the profession as they had been earlier. The average proportion of all articles by women in Germanics in general language journals, such as the
MLJ. during the total period of the survey is nearly nine (8.7) percent; higher than that in the Germanic journals.
Overall the highest percentage of articles for all journals was generated between 1920 and 1939. Although women were producing between seven and nine 64 percent of all articles published in German, they comprised approximately seventeen percent of the faculty in Germanics at the college and university level. Men, on the other hand, constituted nearly eighty-three percent of the German faculty and were publishing ninety-one to ninety-three percent of the articles indicating—on the surface at least—that women were less productive than their male counterparts when only published material was considered. Table 5: Article Totals for Journals in Modern Languages, 1889-1949
Year Journal Total Number of Total Number of Percentage of Total Number of Percentage of Articles Articles in German Articles in German Articles by Women Articles by Women
-1889 PMLA 55 13 23.6 0 0 1890-1899 PMLA 125 25 20.0 0 0 JEGP 52 16 30.7 0 0
1900-1909 PMLA 207 28 13.5 0 0 JEGP 159 61 38.3 6 9.8 1910-1919 PMLA 245 21 8.5 1 4.7 JEGP 254 97 38.1 8 8.2 MU 146 28 19.1 10 35.7
1920-1929 PMLA 462 35 7.5 0 0 JEGP 270 91 33.7 4 4.3 MU 452 73 16.1 15 20.5
1930-1939 PMLA 731 82 11.2 9 10.9 JEGP 270 121 44.8 2 1.6 MU 775 108 13.9 26 24.0
1940-1949 PMLA 665 79 11.8 7 8.8 JEGP 367 137 37.3 6 4.3 MU 814 133 16.3 7 5.2
O n Lft 66
Because no truly accurate statistics exist on publication rates in a specific
subject area, the results obtained here may be skewed for several reasons. First, it
is likely that the average rate of faculty publications was low. John Creswell notes
that, according to a mathematical distribution of performance rates for every
hundred authors who produce a single paper, there are twenty-five who produce
two, eleven with three and so on. Consequently approximately only six percent of
an academic community is producing fifty percent of the papers.21 A cursory look
at the index of each of the journals will confirm a substantial number of authors
who publish more than once in any given volume. Factors that account for
publication disparity between men and women—institutional affiliation, rank and
status (i.e. tenured, untenured, permanent, temporary), career length, and
importance of publication in a faculty member’s total departmental
assignment—were not controlled. In addition, blind submission policies for all journals varied, for example The German Quarterly did not institute article
refereeing until 1978; The Modem Language Journal and PMLA not until 1980.
Because the number of article submissions is unavailable, there is no way of
knowing whether the percentage of articles published by women matches the actual
submission rate or not. Therefore, in this survey most article publications are
determined by the editor, who may or may not have published an unknown or
female author. The only journals to have a female editor were the Germanic
Review. Marie E. Ledermann (later Marie L. Hall) 1946-1956, and The German
Quarterly. Ruth K. Angress 1978-1983, which may have influenced the number of 67 articles published by women during those years. In fact, the percentage of articles authored by women appearing in the Germanic Review did increase during the
1940s, however there is no indication that this was the result of a female editor. A more proportionate rate of publication may therefore exist for women than for men when these factors are taken into account. From the sample taken, survey results show that although women in Germanics were publishing at a constant rate, they were actually far less productive than their male counterparts.
Although studies have demonstrated women’s publication rate in comparison to men’s, none has evaluated women’s publication distribution by type of article and/or book. The type of article an individual publishes is one way of determining, of course, in which area(s) women were publishing; but it also provides a possible means of determining their individual assignments as faculty members within a department. Since teaching and research are complementary areas in higher education, and in any given situation one area might take precedence over the other,22 the type of article a person publishes may in fact be an excellent determinant for establishing the type of courses one is assigned to teach. The type of article one publishes however, is also representative of personal interest, self-motivation, and/or the demands of the position one holds. In comparing the bibliographies of four women with their teaching assignments, it becomes apparent that both teaching activity and personal interest are primary publication motivators.
For example, Lilian Stroebe published several articles on summer schools, an area in which she was personally interested. Likewise Stroebe generally taught 68 beginning language, literature, and conversation courses and published exclusively pedagogical articles. Helen Adolf published widely on medieval topics and routinely taught courses on Germanic myths, chivalric literature, Gothic, and
Middle High German. Articles in each journal were categorized either as literary and/or philological or pedagogical and/or methodological to determine percentages.
An article is defined here as literary if its content was limited to critical, interpretive literary analysis of books, plays—for example "Heinrich von Kleist’s
Marquise von O..." (John C. Blanckenagel, Germanic Review 6 [1931]: 363-72).
Philological articles are those whose content centered on the history and development of the German language and/or Germanic linguistics, for example "Die deutsche Lautverschiebung und die Volkerwanderung" (Eduard Prokosch, JEGP 16
[1917]: 1-27). Pedagogical and methodological classifies articles as dealing with both the theoretical and practical aspects of teaching German, for example "Die direkte Methode in den hoheren Schulen Amerikas" (F. J. Menger, Monatshefte 14
[1913]: 248-71). Table 6 (p. 69-69) illustrates this distribution. Table 6: Distribution of Articles Authored by Women, 1889-1949
Year Journal Total Number of Literary/ Pedagogical/ Articles by Women Philological Other
1890-1899 PMLA 0 __ __ MDU 2 2 ---
JEGP 0 — ---
1900-1909 PMLA 0 __ __ MDU 8 2 6 JEGP 6 6 —
1910-1919 PMLA 1 1 __ MDU 11 — 11 JEGP 8 8 —
MU 10 — 10
1920-1929 PMLA 0 ______MDU 11 --- 11 JEGP 4 4 — MU 15 3 12 GR 4 4 — GQ 5 1 4 1930-1939 PMLA 7 7 _ MDU 33 17 16 JEGP 2 2 — MU 26 — 26 GR 11 11 — GQ 24 8 16 Table 6 Continued
Year Journal Total Number of Literary/ Pedagogical/ Articles by Women Philological Other
1940-1949 PMLA 9 9 ------MDU 25 22 3 JEGP 6 6 — MU 7 1 6 GR 18 18 — GQ 30 10 20
" 4 O 71
Examining the percentage of articles authored by females in journals during a given time demonstrates the publication trends of women in Germanics. For example, between 1890 and 1929 the percentage of women authors increased in Monatshefte and the percentage of the journal’s pedagogical articles remained at 100 percent.
Between 1930 and 1939 the percentage of women authors again increased, but over half (fifty-one percent) of the articles were then in literary analysis and interpretation. During the late 1930s, the focus of Monatshefte became increasingly literary-critical in nature, which explains the decline of pedagogical articles in this particular journal during the 1940s.
The German Quarterly, publishing both methodological and literary articles, began appearing in 1928. This new periodical provided another outlet for pedagogical articles, which earlier might have appeared in Monatshefte or, after
1916, in The Modem Language Journal. Indicators for the lack of pedagogical submissions for GQ in its early years (1928-1944) may be due to the fact that the
M U was already a well established publication and routinely published pedagogical articles. However, the actual number of pedagogical and/or methodological submissions to The German Quarterly was rather low. Editor Curtis Vail noted in
1944 that; "[djespite the fact that the German Quarterly wishes to emphasize pedagogical matters that would interest both the secondary and the college teacher of German, the problem of securing such articles has been a perennial one under each of the three editors your journal has had. Both Bagster-Collins and
Mankiewicz strove to maintain a proper balance between pedagogical and literary 72 articles. Each found himself deluged with literary contributions while a mere trickle of pedagogical articles was forthcoming."23
During 1940 and 1949, eighty-four percent of the articles authored by women in Monatshefte were literary, which further emphasizes the expanding literary focus of the profession, the journal, and the increasingly critical activity of female scholars. During the same time period the other journals essentially maintain their original intent and thus show little fluctuation regarding article type.
General distribution of articles authored by women (in Germanics) in German and general-language journals reveals that, between 1900 and 1909, 42.8 percent of articles (authored by women) were pedagogical in nature; 61.7 percent between
1910 and 1919; 72.9 percent between 1920-29; 57.4 percent between 1930-39; and
30.9 percent between 1940-49. The high percentage of pedagogical articles between 1900 and 1939 can be partially attributed to the establishment of journals with either a total or partial focus on methodology, specifically The Modem
Language Journal in 1916 and The German Quarterly in 1928. Another factor in the high percentage of pedagogical articles can be due to the general interest in improving and legitimizing the status of German in the American curriculum following its demise during and after World War I. The increase in the percentage of literary articles from 1940 to 1949 can be attributed to journals’ shift in focus, primarily that of Monatshefte.
One important theory can be postulated pertaining to the higher percentage of pedagogical articles by women during the years 1910-1939. Due to the 73 hysteria—propaganda against Germany including charges of certain atrocities conducted there, fear that ethnic German-Americans were in collaboration with the enemy—during and after World War I, German enrollment was "either propagandized or actually legislated out of existence."24 Between 1890 and 1915 enrollment in German increased steadily, reaching 24.4 percent of all foreign language enrollments (the highest percentage for foreign language enrollment in modem languages) in 1915.25 The entrance of the United States into World War I brought about a nearly immediate decline in German instruction.26 Twenty-two states passed laws antagonistic to the teaching of foreign languages—but especially of German—and by 1922 German enrollment in secondary schools had dropped to
0.6 percent of all student enrollment in the schools.27 More specifically, between
September 1918 and September 1920, New York City schools actually prohibited beginning German instruction, resulting in an enrollment drop from 13,000 to
60—which essentially forced German from the curriculum.28 After the war the study of German made a modest recovery. However, because German had been eliminated at the elementary and high school levels, this recovery was chiefly at the beginning level in colleges and universities. An examination of articles in the professional journals shows that the profession was conscious of its role in keeping
German in the curriculum. Robert H. Fife points out, in "On the Teaching of
German": "As teachers of German we must think of our subject less in terms of politics and more in terms of the widest culture. Here we still have at hand for our
students the great storehouses of science, poetry and art. Here we shall find that 74 the Great War, like other wars, has failed to touch the real substantive material, whose value made for the study of German the position which it occupied in
America before 1914. "29 Other articles in The Modem Language Journal, such as "National Aspects of Modem Language Teaching in the Present Emergency,"
(John D. Fitzgerald, Modem Language Journal 3 [1918]: 49-62) "National Ideals and the Teaching of Modem Languages," (Marian P. Whitney, Modem Language
Journal 3 [1918]: 5-13) and "The Importance of Foreign Language Study in the
General Scheme of American Education" (Charles M. Purin, Modem Language
Journal. 4 [1919-20]: 325-30) agree with Fife’s viewpoint. They stress that the values ascribed to German literature, science, music, and art had not been canceled by the war. However each agrees about the need to adjust to a new situation and to reassess both the subject matter and its methodology. Additional arguments for keeping German in the curriculum, as well as attempts to justify its study for practical reasons—expansion of foreign travel and international business
necessitating the use of foreign languages—and for general intellectual growth, are
numerous.
Overall, however, the percentage of pedagogical articles in Germanic and
modem language periodicals is consistently lower in each of the ten-year time
periods surveyed. Only The Modem Language Journal routinely shows a high
proportion of German pedagogical and teacher-oriented articles. However, the M U
was founded, in part, to give an outlet for pedagogical/methodological research and
opinion. Moreover, since it was not devoted to one specific language, the actual 75 focus of an article could be diminished because of additional emphasis on other languages, a fact which became more important following World War I. The high rate of female publications in pedagogy may indicate that the majority of their teaching assignments focused on teaching and developing beginning courses and teacher training. If most of a woman’s professional time was, in fact, spent teaching language, it would be logical that her publications would focus on pedagogical and methodological subjects. Historically women tended to be concentrated in the lower ranks of the profession and were more likely to be employed at junior and four-year colleges, i.e. institutions where heavy emphasis was placed on teaching.30 In general, women’s relative lack of success in higher education at this time is due, in part, to generally held social attitudes that a woman’s place is in the home.31 William H. Chafe writes (pp. 101-02); "The distribution of sexual roles made it impossible to do both [marriage and job], because, in order to achieve success in a man’s world, they [women] had to accept failure in a woman’s world."32 In addition, men were reluctant to hire and promote women, fearing that their professional status would diminish as they began to be associated with women.33 This fear was supported by the attitudes toward the formation of the normal school and education departments. The normal school’s development was opposed by many faculty because it brought more women into the university—as students and teachers. In addition, men generally held an adverse attitude toward pedagogy because of ..."its low status connections with the mass education of children and its predominance of women students who were 76 expected to teach only provisionally - i.e., provided they remained unmarried.1,34
It was generally believed that teaching, specifically young children, was within the woman’s sphere because of a "supposedly innate moral sense. "3S
Yet women’s teaching ability was not widely accepted in higher education.
Furthermore women "had to fulfill increasingly more stringent professional expectations, expectations fashioned mostly by men, who had wives ready to assume all the other responsibilities of their lives.1,36 As the academic profession grew it required a greater commitment—research as well as teaching. Marion
Kilson provides a statistical distribution of women’s faculty rank, one that indicates that females held a consistently higher percentage of instructor and assistant professor ranks than did men. In 1959 for instance, women in all academic disciplines constituted 19.1 percent of all faculty women, but held the following ranks: professor 9.9 percent, associate professor 17.5 percent, assistant professor
21.7 percent, and instructor 29.3 percent.37 Regarding institutional type, a 1921 survey by the American Association of University Professors documents that less than one percent of all professorships at twenty-seven institutions with an all male student body (including all of the more noted eastern universities) were female.
Only 7.9 percent of all professorships at a hundred co-educational institutions were held by women in the same year. Yet fifty-five percent of all professorships at women’s colleges were female.38 These figures demonstrate proof of the theory that women’s ability was recognized more fully at all female institutions. Women’s colleges provided an intellectual environment designed specifically for female 77 students and faculty which provided them with the possibility of advancement not found at any other type of institution. The American Association of University
Professors, founded in 1900, instituted efforts to standardize degrees, advanced programs, and admission requirements at all member colleges. Along similar lines, the North Central Association established in 1909 the first set of comprehensive standards for accrediting colleges. By 1920 other regional organizations had adopted similar measures.39 Women’s colleges were AAUP members and were accredited institutions. Therefore, educational standards at women’s colleges were similar to those at other institutions. Yet only at women’s colleges were female faculty members able to adopt and pursue professional standards set by leading institutions.40 These schools enabled women to rise to the top of their academic careers because they were relatively free from the competition of male academicians.41 Because of this condition, the women who taught at these colleges were more likely to publish in their respective disciplines and be accepted at professional meetings. A cursory glance at any of the professional language journals between 1900 and 1950 indicates that the majority of women who routinely published in Germanics were teaching at women’s colleges—Goucher, Hunter, Mt.
Holyoke, Smith, Barnard, Bryn Mawr, and Vassar.42
Prolific publication in Germanics, as in most disciplines, is accomplished by
a small group of scholars. Prolific publication is defined here as more than three
articles or one book every two years. This definition is based on three studies.
Dunham’s "Teaching Faculty in Universities and Four-Year Colleges,"43 78 demonstrates that in 1963 seventy-eight percent of all college faculty had never published a book and forty-three percent of all faculty had never published an article. The second study, "Rewards and Fairness: Academic Women in the United
States,"44 citing publication percentages for university faculty only, concludes that, on average, during a two-year period, less than three percent of faculty members were actively publishing. Helen Astin’s survey, "Factors Affecting Women’s
Scholarly Productivity,"45 indicates that sixty percent of academic women from all scholarly disciplines and thirty-nine percent of their male counterparts never published an article. With a few members of the profession publishing large amounts of research results, we can assume that the impact of these few on the profession is great. In surveying professional language journals it becomes apparent that several women have been part of the small publishing core in
Germanics. An examination of four women’s bibliographies, with publications ranging from 1891 (the first publication date) to 1982 (the last item published), discloses not only a large quantity of publication, but the women’s broad subject range as well.
I compiled bibliographies for Marian Whitney, Lilian Stroebe, Melitta
Gerhard and Helen Adolf (pp. 7-205). Each bibliography, based on quantity, illustrates high personal motivation and fulfills the requirements noted above for prolific publishing. The bibliographies may also illustrate the need for ample publications by women to gain academic promotions. By retirement, after twenty or more years of service, each had earned a doctorate and had achieved the rank of 79 professor. Lilian Stroebe, in a thirty-eight year career, published twenty-three articles, authored two books, and edited a dozen more. She consistently published between three and four articles every two years and edited or wrote a textbook as well. Over a twenty year period Helen Adolf published fifty-three articles, authored two books, and edited three more. She regularly produced upwards of four articles every two years. Whitney authored seven books, edited three others, and had five articles in print during her twenty-four year career. Melitta Gerhard has written nineteen articles and four books in her twenty-two year career to date.
These four women published extensively. Given the fact that few in the profession publish regularly, their scholarly contribution is all the more significant.
Although women commonly publish less than their male counterparts, there are those, as indicated by the four bibliographies, who have contributed more. 80
1. Paul H. Morrill & Emil R. Spees, The Academic Profession:Teaching in Higher Education (New York: Human Sciences, 1982): 24-25.
2. Morrill & Spees, p. 24-25.
3. "Graduate Programs: Looking Toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 323.
4. See AAUP 1921 Bulletin VII, quoted in Woody p. 329.
5. "And What of Young Women?" AAUP Bulletin 33 (1947): 301-02.
6. Ralph E. Dunham, Patricia D. Wright & Marjorie O. Chandler, Teaching Faculty in Universities and Four-Year Colleges (Washington: GPO, 1966): 16.
7. Morrill & Spees, p. 168.
8. Meeting the Challenges: Developing Faculty Careers. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Reports 3 (Washington:ASHE, 1983): 20.
9. Helen Astin, "Factors Affecting Women’s Scholarly Productivity," The Higher Education of Women, ed. Helen S. Astin & Werner A. Hirsch (New York: Praeger, 1978): 133-57; Alan E. Bayer & Helen S. Astin, "Sex Differentials in the Academic Reward System," Science 188 (1975): 796-802; Jessie Bernard, Academic Women (University Park: Penn State UP, 1964); Tessa Blackstone & Oliver Fulton, "Men and Women Academica: An Anglo-American Comparison of Subject Choices and Research Activity," Higher Education 3 (1974): 119-40; John W. Creswell, "Conceptual Explanations of Research Performance," ASHE Reader on Faculty and Faculty Issues in Colleges and Universities, ed. Martin J. Finkelstein (Washington: ASHE, 1987): 240-48; John W. Creswell, "Correlates of Research Performance," ASHE Reader on Faculty and Faculty Issues in Colleges and Universities. 2nd ed., ed. Martin J. Finkelstein (Washington: ASHE, 1987): 249-62; John A. Centra, Women. Men, and the Doctorate. (Princeton: ETS, 1974); Martin J. Finkelstein, "Women and Minority Faculty," ASHE Reader on Faculty and Faculty Issues in Colleges and Universities, ed. Martin J. Finkelstein (Washington: ASHE 1987): 66-97; Oliver Fulton, "Rewards and Fairness: Academic Women in the United States," Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education, ed. Martin J. Trow (New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975): 199-248; Martin Trow & Oliver Fulton, "Research Activity in American Higher Education," Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education, ed. Martin Trow (New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975): 39-83.
10. Minnie M. Miller, "Women in University Teaching," Journal of the American Association of University Women 54 (1961): 153.
11. See for example, Finkelstein, p. 83; Bernard, p. 121. 81
12. Bernard, p. 116.
13. Creswell, p. 242; Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1933," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 103-04.
14. Camegie-American Council on Education Faculty 1969 and 1972 surveys cited in Finkelstein, p. 84.
15. Fulton, p. 248.
16. Henry J. Schmidt, "Rationales and Sources for a History of German Studies in the United States," Monatshefte 75 (1983): 262.
17. Not all journals instituted a blind review process, therefore the chance for an article to be published because the author is well-known increases.
18. "Forward," German Quarterly 1 (1928): 1.
19. Germanic Review 1 (1926): 1.
20. The author’s institutional and/or departmental affiliation was often included in the current issue of the journal. When no information was given, names were checked against membership lists of the AATG and/or MLA.
21. Creswell, p. 240.
22. Brookes & German, p. 35; Paul H. Morrill & Emil R. Spees, The Academic Profession: Teaching in Higher Education (New York: Human Sciences, 1982): 28.
23. Editorial letter, German Quarterly 17 (1944): 40-42.
24. Edwin H. Zeydel, "The Teaching of German in the United States from Colonial Times to the Present," Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages. (New York: MLA, 1961): 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 362; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 15-54.
25. William Riley Parker, "The National Interest and Foreign Languages," The Language Curtain (New York: MLA, 1966): 139.
26. John D. Fitzgerald, "National Aspects of Modem Language Teaching in the Present Emergency," Modem Language Journal 3 (1918): 50. 82
27. Parker, p. 140.
28. "Notes and News." Modem Language Journal 5 (1921): 380-81.
29. Modem Language Journal 5 (1920): 26.
30. Roberta Frankfort, Collegiate Women. Domesticity and Career in Tum- of-the-Centurv America (New York: New York UP, 1977): 9; Finkelstein p. 71; Blackstone and Fulton p. 126.
31. See for example American Women, ed. Durward Howes (Teaneck, NJ: Zephurus, 1974): 99; Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Woman’s Place: Options and Limits in Professional Careers (Berkeley: U of California P, 1971): 23.
32. The American Woman: Her Changing Social. Economic & Political Roles. 1920-1970. (New York: Oxford UP, 1974).
33. Rosalind Rosenberg, "The Limits of Access: The History of Coeducation in America," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe, (New York: Norton, 1988) 125-26.
34. Geraldine Jongich Clifford, "Introduction," Lone Vovagers. Academic Women in Coeducational Universities. 1870-1937. ed. Geraldine Jongich Clifford (New York: Feminist Press, 1989): 19.
35. Frankfort, p. 9.
36. Rosenberg, p. 126.
37. Marion Kilson, "The Status of Women in Higher Education," Signs 1 (1976): 935-42.
38. "AAUP Preliminary Report on the Status of Women," Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 7 (1921): 22.
39. Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1933," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 103-04;
40. Mabel Newcomer, A Century of Higher Education for American Women. (New York: Harper & Row, 1959): 3.
41. Hummer, pp. 103-04; Willystine Goodsell, "The Educational Opportunities of American Women—Theoretical and Actual," Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 12. 83
42. Helen Adolf, Penn State; Lydia Baer, Swarthmore; Emma Birkmaier, Minnesota; Bertha Reed Coffman, Simmons; Else Fleissner, Wisconsin; Melitta Gerhard, Wittenberg; Jane Goodloe, Goucher; Luise Haessler, Hunter/Brooklyn; Stella Hinz, Wisconsin; Ruth Hofrichter, Vassar; Gabriele Humbert, Vassar; Anna Jacobson, Hunter; Mimi Jehle, Illinois; Ada Klett Bister, Vassar; Erika Meyer, Mt Holyoke; Anna Schafheitlin, Kent State; Lilian Stroebe, Vassar; Marian Whitney, Vassar; Eva Wunderlich, Upsala.
43. Dunham, et. al. p. 37.
44. Fulton, pp. 222-23.
45. The Higher Education of Women, ed. Helen S. Astin & Werner Z. Hirsch. New York: Praeger, 1978: 133-57. CHAPTER IV
WOMEN AND THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
TEACHERS OF GERMAN
Active participation in professional organizations is, in addition to scholarly publications and teaching, another measure of professional achievement. The concerns of the profession are often best reflected in the articles published in association journals as well as in the type of papers presented at annual meetings and scholarly symposia. However, in addition to publishing articles and presenting papers, an individual can advance the goals of the profession by functioning as an elected officer, working as a committee member, and/or by becoming involved in local organizational chapters. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate and evaluate women’s involvement in the AATG from its inception in 1926 to the end of this survey in 1950. Current data are included in this chapter for comparison and contrast with the historical information. Trends show that although Germanics is becoming increasingly feminized, i.e. there are more women graduate students completing doctorates and more women employed in the profession than in previous decades, the proportion of women represented in the professional organizations has changed little.
84 85 The American Association of Teachers of German (AATG) was, until recently, the only organization for Germanists. While the Modem Language
Association (MLA)—founded in 1883—and specifically its Germanic sections, has been/is an additional professional outlet for Germanists in the United States, the focus of the organization is almost purely literary.1 Records of early MLA annual meetings are incomplete, and it is difficult to identify those women who were
Germanists. During the first two decades of the organization MLA members took an active interest in pedagogical and methodological matters. However, after 1903 the MLA developed more as a "society of researchers rather than a society of teachers."2 Indications of the MLA’s research orientation can be seen in the dissolution of the Pedagogical Section in 1903, which did not make another appearance until the Association resolved in 1946 not to abandon the study of modem languages. Furthermore, the official statement of purpose, which in 1927 changed from "the advancement of the study of modem languages" to "the advancement of research in the modem languages and their literatures" is another indication of the research emphasis of organization.3 Thus, until the mid 1940s the
MLA, due to the nature of the association, generally excluded modem language teachers whose main interests lay in pedagogy and methodology. The Nationaler
Deutschlehrerbund. which developed around the same time as the MLA, was another professional group for German teachers. The purpose of this organization was the teaching of German language and literature, specifically, how to impart
German language and culture to future generations of German-Americans. 86 Although the Lehrerbund founded the journal Padaeogische Monatshefte. which evolved into the current Monatshefte. the organization itself dissolved in 1928.
While some Germanists who pursue more literary and theoretical studies attend only MLA meetings, I have chosen to examine women’s involvement only in the AATG because this organization focusses exclusively on teaching and research in German language, literature, and culture, and the AATG consistently addresses both pedagogical as well as literary issues. An examination of women’s involvement in the organization provides significant insights into their commitment to and interests in Germanics.
In order to assess women’s participation in and contribution to the AATG, available data were compiled and evaluated on membership, officer nominations and election results, conference presenters and discussion leaders, and committee assignments and activities. A thorough examination of annual meeting reports,
Constitutions and revisions thereof, membership listings, local AATG chapter reports, and editorials and letters published in The German Quarterly, the official publication of the AATG, provides much of the information analyzed here.
The history of the American Association of Teachers of German is documented in several investigations: Camillo von Klenze’s "The American
Association of Teachers of German"4; Sol Liptzin’s "Early History of the
A.A.T.G. (1926-31)"5; Edwin Zeydel’s "The Teaching of German in the United
States from Colonial Times to the Present"6; and, recently, Gerhard Weiss’s "From
New York to Philadelphia: Issues and Concerns of the American Association of Teachers of German between 1926 and 1970. "7 Each confirms that World War I and its aftermath greatly affected the teaching of and enrollment in German in
American schools and colleges. Zeydel comments; "The propaganda, which had concentrated upon the German emperor, his army and submarines... turned
immediately, now that we were at war, against the language, its literature as a whole, and in some cases even against its teachers.."8 That this propaganda destroyed the earlier, positive image of German is evidenced in the dramatic drop
in German language enrollment. Zeydel writes; "[b]etween 1917 and 1919 the teaching of German became practically non-existent in the public and private high schools, 315,884 (28%) of whose students had still been studying it in 1915. By
1922, four years after the end of the war, the high schools had less than 14,000 students of German, or little more than one-half of one per cent of the high school enrollment of 2,500,000. "9 Thus, the AATG was established in 1926 primarily to
improve the status of German in American schools. German enrollment never really recovered; even in 1949, German high school enrollment was less than one percent (0.8%) of the total school enrollment in the United States.10 The process of restoring German to the American school curriculum increased the demand for a strong organization of teachers who could advance the study of German and offer one another professional support. The first step in improving the position of
German in American schools and colleges, according to Camillo von Klenze, was
the "formation of an organization embracing all teachers of German in every part of the country."11 The founding of the American Association of Teachers of German 88 in 1926, was therefore, the result of "...an increasing demand for a dynamic organization of teachers of German..."12 intending "[t]o spread the knowledge of
German in this country by increasing the efficiency of the teaching of German."13
Yet other factors encouraging the establishment of the AATG were the relative success of the American Association of Teachers of Spanish (1917) in advancing the growth of interest in Spanish, and the concurrent founding (1926) of an American
Association of Teachers of French (AATF). The idea of a new German teachers’ organization was met with skepticism. Individuals felt that German teachers could voice problems and discuss issues at the MLA (Germanic section). The MLA, however, had never encouraged high school memberships, so the concept of a
German teachers’ organization for secondaryand college instructors was new.
Furthermore, The Modem Language Journal, in which articles on German language teaching could be published, already existed. To counter these misgivings, it was proposed that the new organization be formed initially from local groups which would be sponsored by a national or central chapter. Once enough local chapters were established the recruiting functions of these groups could then be taken over by the national organization. Two organizations, Per Verein deutscher Lehrer von
New York, an exclusively male club and The New York Chapter of High School
Teachers, a predominantly female group, established the AATG, or more specifically the Metropolitan Chapter in 1926. The following year four additional chapters were established—Finger Lakes, Western New York, Central New York and Hudson Valley. The founding members of the Metropolitan chapter felt that as 89 the situation in Germany had changed, pedagogical methods and textbooks needed to be reviewed and materials published that were more attuned to the current needs of American students.14 The first officers elected, Camillo von Klenze
(president), Sol Liptzin (secretary), and H.A. Buschek (treasurer) were authorized to initiate further development of the organization.
That the initial AATG was comprised of separate male and female groups invites comment. Some would believe that sexual bias is apparent from the segregation of men and women in the early organization. This notion has some merit, since the percentage of college professors was noticeably higher in the early years of the AATG and there were proportionally more men employed in colleges and universities. There is, however, no evidence to indicate the ratio of male to female members in the original AATG. The membership then could possibly have been equally divided between men and women. Women presumably constituted half of the initial founding group of teachers, yet no women were elected senior officers (president or secretary) of the new association—a dubious standard which continued until 1949.
By 1932 only five years after the founding of the AATG, it was a well established national organization. Robert H. Fife explains: "A number of representative chapters have been established; a respectable paying membership is enrolled and an official journal has been functioning long enough already to have made a genuine contribution to the literature of the German teacher. All of these things have been brought about by persistent and self-denying work on the part of a 90 relatively small number of teachers and it is now our duty to build a great and enduring structure on the solid foundation that they have laid."15 As others had done prior to him, Fife endorsed a review of the present curriculum and methodology and acknowledged that "[w]e [German teachers] have got to consider what is best to meet present American conditions and experiment until we shall have arrived at a methodology that will be adopted to them."16
The goal of the Association in the early years was primarily pedagogical; members were invited to evaluate and devise syllabus materials that would be useful in developing a new methodology. This project entailed the selection and rating of vocabulary, idiom, and syntax materials as well as publishing experiments and time- saving methods using these new resources. These topics were regularly addressed at the annual meetings and in articles published in The German Quarterly. For example, in these early volumes of the GQ one finds articles such as "To Stimulate
Interest in the Study of German" (Eugenia Bach 1 [1928]: 181-83), "What Price
Vocabulary Frequencies?" (William R. Price 2 [1929]: 1-5), "Reading
Comprehension Tests," (Lilian Stroebe 3 [1930]: 79-94), "Notes on Modem
Textbooks," (Gertrude H. Dunham 4 [1931]: 45-50), "The Association of the
Central West and South Adopts a New Standard Word List," (Peter Hagboldt 4
[1931]: 118-23), "On Learning Rules in the Study of a Foreign Language,"
(Edward L. Thorndike 4 [1931]: 89-95), "Underlying Principles and Aims of
Present-day Modem Language Teaching," (E.W. Bagster-Collins 5 [1932]: 161-77),
"An Experiment in Motivation," (Bertha Reed Coffman 5 [1932]: 17-20), and 91
"Some Phases of First and Second Year College German" (John L. Kind 5 [1932]:
178-87). All the authors expressed the need for well-defined objectives in teaching modem foreign languages since the average time devoted to learning a language was only two years. Furthermore, these authors pointed out successful strategies for encouraging students to use the language creatively rather than spending the majority of classroom time in rote learning.
Papers read at the early annual meetings, like the articles appearing in the
Quarterly, focused primarily on pedagogical topics. In fact, one of the principal purposes of the AATG, via papers presented at annual meetings, was to "help those teachers who find acquaintance with recent currents difficult, to become energetically alive to the new problems and the new possibilities."17 Many papers and symposia feature changes in methodology or teacher training and include such titles as; "Principles and Practices in Graded Readers," "Symposium on the
Training of Secondary School Teachers," "Creating Interest in the Study of German
- A Personal Effort," "Methods of Teaching German," "The Objectives and
Methodology of the Second Year," and "Methods in Presenting Grammar."
Ordinarily only four and five papers were read and discussed at each annual meeting compared to the scope of current programs (133 papers at the 1991 annual meeting). Between 1931 (the first annual meeting) and 1949 at annual meetings,18 at total of only four women (approximately two percent) presented papers—Jane
Goodloe (Goucher College) 1936, Carola Geiger (DePaul University) 1945,
Elfriede Ackerman (Von Steuben High School, Chicago) 1947, and Elise Heyse Dummer (Elmhurst College) 1948.19 While these four women authors represent only two percent of the presenters, the number of women leading symposia or discussions was greater—approximately 45 percent (Elfriede Ackerman (1933,
1934), Lydia Meyer (1933), Lilian Stroebe (1935), Emma Ceremak (1938), and
Marjorie Lawson (1939)).20 This discrepancy between scholarship and organization suggests a certain irony when AATG members ask women to furnish leadership and organizational skills at the AATG meetings, but ignore their scholarship. In fact, relegating women to introduce symposia speakers essentially silenced them since they were not presenting their own scholarship, but acting primarily as hostesses. Assigning women to administrative positions at annual meetings and not allowing them to present papers strongly implies that leading
AATG members felt women had nothing of import to contribute in the intellectual development of the profession. Because the number of paper submissions is unavailable, it is impossible to conclude whether a paper was rejected because the author/presenter was female. The number of submissions, however, would be at least equal to the percentage of papers authored by women and published in the official AATG journal, The German Quarterly, since it is likely that those women who were publishing were also submitting papers to be read at annual meetings.
The average percentage of articles authored by women between 1926 and 1949 is approximately ten percent; therefore, the number of papers presented by women at the annual meetings was minimal. Considering the time and expense of travelling to these meetings and the low number of papers presented, annual sessions 93 generally need highly visible names to attract attendees. Although women may have published with some success, they may not have been invited to present because they lacked the necessary reputation to ensure high attendance at annual meetings.
The high level of pedagogical concern is also reflected in various AATG activities. Such activities show a concern for quality teaching and materials, as well as involvement in improving the status of German in the United States, and include, for example, the development of a minimum standard vocabulary list, the establishment of a national Service Bureau, involvement in curriculum planning, and teacher training. Several of these activities enjoyed relative success, notably the standard vocabulary list and the Service Bureau.21 Other activities, however, remained in committees with discussions continued in articles and editorials.
Women’s involvement in any of these endeavors, as is any one individual’s, is difficult to ascertain. The names of committee members have evidently not been preserved since the AATG’s own national office does not have records of this nature.
The minimum standard vocabulary list for German was accepted by the members of the AATG in 1933. This list is based largely on the German
Frequency Word Book compiled by Bayard Quincy Morgan and Walter
Wadepuhl.22 The initial phases of the standard list can be traced to a basic vocabulary list compiled from twenty different grammar books in 1923 by Walter
Wadepuhl. Morgan helped work on Wadepuhls’ list, but he also wanted to include 94 items from F.W. Kaeding’s nearly eleven million word list, Haufiekeitsworterbuch der deutschen Sprache.23 He assembled the German Frequency Word Book, a list of 2402 basic words, based largely on Kaeding’s work. In 1931 a committee was organized within the AATG to study the question of a minimum standard word list.
A vote was requested the following year regarding: 1) the desirability of establishing a minimum standard vocabulary; 2) the propriety of taking the Morgan-
Kaeding German Frequency Word Book as the starting point for such a list. The vote was approved and the committee revised and improved the list (2150 words).
The Minimum Standard German Vocabulary was published in 1934. The success of the Graded German Readers by Peter Hagboldt, in which texts were reworked using the standard vocabulary list as a foundation, is but one example of the value of this vocabulary list.24
The German Service Bureau grew out of the Interscholastic Federation of
German Clubs (1927), which was established as a result of the revived post-war interest in teaching German. The Service Bureau, established at the University of
Wisconsin, acted as a central clearinghouse for available teaching and cultural materials. The Bureau was frequently used by all German teachers who needed good quality, current teaching materials. The Service Bureau was therefore,
"...nicht blofi fur die Arbeit in den deutschen Vereinen..., sondem auch vielseitige
Anregungen und Hilfsmittel, wie sich namentlich die Vermittlung deutscher
Kulturarbeit in den Unterrichtsklassen zu gestalten habe."25 With the advent of
World War II, the Interscholastic Federation of German Clubs was suspended and 95 with it the Service Bureau, since materials were difficult to acquire during the War.
Stella Hinz worked as the Bureau’s secretary and librarian from its establishment until her death in 1938.26 Through the "Service Bureau Notes" appearing regularly in Monatshefte. Hinz suggested "Realien" and periodicals; supplied addresses of publishers; encouraged individuals to send in notes on successful methods and ideas; and generally tried to solve problems connected with the teaching of German. Although Hinz was the impetus behind the Bureau, establishing, organizing, and supplying materials to teachers, she has rarely been recognized for her accomplishments.
In 1939 a National Commission on Cooperative Curriculum Planning was founded to study the general education curriculum to determine; 1) ways in which special subjects [foreign languages] can contribute to a modem general education program and 2) ways in which teachers can cooperate in building a curriculum based on the needs of the students and the demands of a pluralistic society.27 The
Committee consisted of representatives in all educational areas. One of the results of the study was to point out the value of modem language study "...as a means of introduction to general language, as a means of promoting understanding of comparative cultures and appreciation of nationality and racial contributions to
American life, as well as the enjoyable reading in the foreign language itself.1,28
The report emphasizes the necessity of studying different cultures existing in our
own (American) environment. 96
Although AATG membership increased steadily between 1926 and 1950, a constant problem was its relatively small representation of college and high school teachers in terms of number of members compared to the number of Germanists and German teachers in the profession. Unfortunately since membership in the
AATG is not mandatory for any German teacher and is open to anyone interested in
German language, culture, and literature, it is impossible to determine what percentage of members were employed as German teachers or what percentage of
German teachers were AATG members. Gerhard Weiss writes; "[i]t has never been possible to obtain the exact number of active German teachers in this country.
However when we consider the mailing lists available at AATG headquarters, we find that less than half of those listed are actual members of the association."29
The lack of a unified professional organization for foreign language teachers also makes it difficult to compile a comprehensive listing of foreign language teachers.30 The German Quarterly published its first membership list in 1950, but the AATG office kept no records of individual memberships earlier than 1978.31
Neither the number of female members between 1926 and 1949 nor the total membership can be determined.
Frequent membership campaigns and appeals encouraged teachers to join the
AATG. In 1933, for example, then AATG President Alexander Hohlfeld commented: "Not only do we as individual teachers of German need a strong central organization, but this central organization, if it is to function successfully in the interests of all, needs in turn as its active and contributing members every 97 individual teacher of German who is properly interested in his own professional self-improvement, in the effectiveness of his work in the classroom, and in the recognition accorded to his subject in the national educational scheme as a whole. "32 Some might infer from the use of "his" in the quotation that Hohlfeld called out only to the men of the profession, concluding that Hohlfeld unconsciously believed that the goals of the organization and the profession could only be met by men. Others would contend that this claim of sexual bias is wholly unfounded since the use of neutralized pronouns was not standard practice in 1933.
Although its configuration has changed over the years, the AATG is directed by an Executive Council consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents, and a
Secretary (elected by ballot at the annual meeting), the Managing Editor and
Business Manager of The German Quarterly (appointed by the Executive Council), and six additional elected members. The Executive Council also confirms the
Editor’s appointments to the editorial board of the GO. Because the policy making body of the AATG is its Executive Council and the Association’s business is conducted by elected officers and committees,33 it becomes significant to examine
AATG nominations and elections. It is reasonable to assume that those nominated and elected as officers and council members are respected members of the profession.
The original AATG Constitution and Bv-laws were unanimously accepted at the annual meeting in 1931. Subsequent changes in 1934, 1938 and 1941 primarily affected the administration of the organization, such as terms of office and 98
executive appointments and these changes to the Constitution remained in effect until 1969.34 In 1934 a committee headed by Lilian Stroebe proposed that in order
to advocate better representation for women as well as improve consideration of
regional distribution and representation of high school and college teachers in balloting and elections, an amendment be added to Section IV, Paragraph 3 to read:
"In making up the ballot, due consideration shall be given, so far as possible, to the
representation of the several regions, to the representation of teachers from the
several schools and colleges, and to the representation of the women members of the Association. "35 Obviously the committee members felt that the association was failing to represent all members fairly. That such a committee even existed, indicates that, while women were not a negligible group in the AATG, they were not receiving the recognition they felt they deserved. In addition, the committee recommended that "[i]n order to insure the success of this plan... the ballot [shall] pit[ting] women against women, high school teachers against high school teachers
and college teachers against college teachers."36 The attempt to balance AATG
officers is due to the exclusion of women and high school teachers from authority,
i.e. leadership, positions as evidenced by the activity of Stroebe’s committee.
Consequently, beginning in 1938 those nominated for Executive Council positions
were divided into a high school group or a college/university group, and those
nominated for other offices generally were academic equals. To illustrate, four
individuals were nominated for two available executive council positions. Generally
the nominations included both high school and college teachers, but there was no 99 guarantee that both would later be represented on the council. In 1938 nominations for executive council members were divided into a college and a high school group.
One individual was then elected from each group, thus insuring council representation for both high school and college teachers. It is difficult to determine from available data whether the issue of providing better representation for women continued to be a concern. In fact, by 1957, because of "inconsistencies and inaccuracies," changes were proposed to the Constitution which resulted in dropping Article 3 that gave due representation of women in making up the election ballot.37 Yet, in surveying election results from 1939-49, it becomes clear that the committee’s resolution was not a panacea. Women still were not elected as president or secretary and only two women were elected as First Vice-President, one in 1938 and one in 1942. Not until thirty-six years later, in 1978, was another women elected to that position.
The availability of published nominations for officers and members of the executive council is limited. For example, between 1927 and 1932 none was published and nominations after 1946 were not published in The German Quarterly, but mailed separately to AATG members.38 Consequently the conclusions reached here are based only on the nominations published in The German Quarterly between
1934 and 1944. The ballot was assembled by a five member nominating committee appointed by the President. Normally, two of the five committee members were women. Women comprised at least one-third of the ballot each year reaching fifty 100 percent in 1939. Election results for the same years indicate women holding approximately one third of the offices (Tables 7-9 pp. 101-109). Table 7: Elected Officers—President and First Vice-President, 1927-1991, of the American Association of Teachers of German
President First Vice-President
1927 Camillo von Klenze U. Munich 1927 E.W. Bagster- Columbia U. Collins
1928-31 E.W. Bagster-Collins Columbia U. 1928-31 Adolf Busse Hunter College 1932 Robert Herndon Fife Columbia U. 1932 Max Griebsch U. Wisconsin 1933 A.R. Holfeld U. Wisconsin 1933 Erwin Mohme U. Southern California 1934 John A. Walz Harvard U. 1934 Frederick Betz George Washington HS, New York
1935 Albert W. Aron U. of Illinois 1935 J.B.E. Jonas DeWitt Clinton HS, New York 1936 Theodore Huebener Asst Dir. MFL, Board of Ed., 1936 F.W. Meisnest U. Washington New York
1937 Frank H. Reinsch UCLA 1937 Christian F. Hamff Emoiy U. 1938 Edward F. Hauch Hamilton College 1938 Thelma Bryant Thomas Jefferson HS, Virginia
1939-40* Ernst Feise Johns Hopkins 1939-40 Alfred Kalmer Louisville Male HS, Kentucky
1941 John 0 . Hess Ohio U. 1941 Lawrence M. Price Berkeley
1942 George Danton Union College 1942 A.E. Zucker U. Maryland
1943.44 b George Baerg DePauw U. 1943-44 Otto K. Liedke Hamilton College
a In 1940 all officers were reelected due to a modification in the Constitution changing their terms of office from one to two years.
b The executive committee postponed elections in 1943 since only thirty ballots were sent innot enough to hold an election (GO 16 (1943): 43. Table 7 Continued
President First Vice-President 1945 Richard Jente U. North Carolina, Chapel Hill 1945 Victor Lange Cornell U.
1946 John C. Blankenagel Ohio Wesleyan 1946 Harold von Hofe UCLA
1947 Curtis C.D. Vail U. Washington 1947 Alfred Senn U. Pennsylvania
1948 Charles M. Purin U. of Wisconsin, Madison 1948 B.Q. Morgan Stanford U. 1949 Ernst Jockers U. Pennsylvania 1949 Gunther Keil Hunter College
1950 Gunter Keil Hunter College 1950 Walter A, Reichart U. Michigan 1951 Walter A. Reichart U. Michigan 1951 Bernhard Ulmer Princeton
1952 C. R. Goedsche Northwestern U. 1952-54 Edwald Appelt U. Rochester
1953-55 Werner Neuse Middlebury 1955 Helmut Rehder U. Texas
1956-59 Alfred Senn U. Pennsylvania 1956 George A.C. Scherer U. Colorado
1960 John G. Kunstmann U. North Carolina 1957 Erich Hofacker Washington U.
1961 Harold Lenz Queens College 1958 Victor Lange Princeton 1962-63 John G. Kunstmann U. North Carolina 1959 John D. Workman U. Wisconsin
1964-67 Karl-Heinz Planitz Wabash College 1960 Karl S. Weimer Brown U. Table 7 Continued
President First Vice-President
1968-69 George Metcalf U. Chicago 1961 Philip W. McDowell New Trier HS
1970-71 Guy Stem U. Cincinnati 1962 Hubert J. Meessen Indiana U.
1972-73 Margaret McKenzie Vassar 1963 George Scherer U. Colorado 1974-75 Reinhold Grimm U. Wisconsin 1964 Harry Steinhauer Western Reserve U. 1976-77 Gustave Bording Cal State Fullerton 1965 Frederick J. Indiana U. Mathieu Beharriell
1978-79 Edward Diller U. Oregon 1966 Paul Schlauch U. Nebraska
1980-81 Adolph Wegener Muhlenberg College 1967 Herman Ramras U. Minnesota 1982-83 Gerhard Weiss U. Minnesota 1968 Glenn Waas Colgate 1984 Frank M. Grittner U. Wisconsin 1969-70 Walter F.W. Lohnes Stanford U.
1985-86 Herta Stephenson St. Josephs’s College 1971-72 Frank G. Banta Indiana U.
1987 Robert DiDonato MIT 1973-74 William J. Harvey E. Texas State U. 1988-89 Adeidine Moeller Central HS; Nebraska 1975 Will-Robert Teetor Cornell
1990-91 Renate Schulz U. Arizona 1976 Kenneth Keeton Collegium of Comparative Culture
1977 Merriam Moore Ridgefield HS 1978 Helen Lepke Kent State U.
1979-80 Hugo Schmidt U. Colorado Table 7 Continued
First Vice-President 1981-82 Joanna M. Ralych Rutgers U.
1983 Frank M. Grittner U. Wisconsin 1984 Herta Stephenson St. Joseph’s College
1985 Jermaine D. Arendt Minneapolis
1986 Robert DiDonato MIT 1987 Adeidine Moeller Central HS; Nebraska
1988-89 Renate Schulz U. Arizona 1990-91 Elizabeth Hoffmann Nebraska Dept, of Education Table 8: Elected Officers—Second and Third Vice-President, 1927-1991 of the American Association of Teachers of German
Second Vice-President Third Vice-President
1927 Adolf Busse Hunter College 1927 Katherine Walton HS, New York Kummerle
1928-31 Katharine Walton HS, New York 1928-31 NONE Kummerle
1932 William R. Price Ed. Department, New York 1932 Katherine Walton HS, New York Kummerle
1933 F.A.H. Leuchs New Utrecht HS, Brooklyn 1933 Jane Goodloe Goucher College 1934 Charles M. Purin U. Wisconsin 1934 Ernest 0 . U. Washington Eckelmann
1935 Emily White Central HS, Washington DC 1935 Oscar C. Burkhard U. Minnesota
1936 Lydia L. Meyer West Allis HS, Wisconsin 1936 Christian F. Hamff Emory U. 1937 Helen Ott Albany HS 1937 Claire S. U. Maryland Schradieck
1938 Sister M. Coronata Rosary College 1938 Heniy Safford King Reed College Schardt
1939-40 Lilia Garms East HS, Aurora, Illinois 1939-40 Dorothy Johns University HS, Los Angeles
1941 Anna Meyer Central HS, Binghamton, New 1941 Arnold Ortmann Lafayette JHS, Baltimore York
1942 Jacob Hieble Michigan State U. 1942 Henrietta Way Fairfax HS, Los Angeles Table 8 Continued
Second Vice-President Third Vice-President
1943 Gustave O. Arlt UCLA 1943 Annemarie M. U. Buffalo Sauerlander
1944 Emma Biikmaier U. Minnesota 1944
1945 Ruth Hofiichter Vassar College 1945 Albert Van Eerden Princeton U.
1946 Hubert J. Meessen Indiana U. 1946 Ella Liskey Central HS, Minneapolis
1947 Elfriede Ackermann Von Steuben HS, Chicago 1947 Sister Catherine Nazareth College Teresa Rapp
1948 Emma Birkraaier U. Minnesota 1948 Werner Neuse Middlebury College 1949 Florence Anderson Davenport HS 1949 Louis DeVries Iowa State College 1950 Walter A. Reichart U. Of Michigan 1950 Frederick Klemm Union College 1951 Adelaide Madison HS, New York 1951 Ruth Hofrichter Vassar Biesenbach
1952 1952
1953-55 Elfriede Ackermann Von Steuben HS 1953-55 Lydia Baer Swarthmore
1956 Helmut Boeninger Stanford 1956 Helen Ott Albany HS
1957 Anna L. O’Brien Brighton HS, MA 1957 Frieda Gamper MacMurray College
1958 Gertrude Schlueter Proviso Township HS, IL 1958 William I. College of Wooster Schreiber
o o \ Table 8 Continued
Second Vice-President Third Vice-President
195 9 Netta V. Niess Bellville Township HS, IL 1959 Robert D. Wayne California Institute of Technology
1960 Bertha Ott William Horlick HS 1960 Helmut R. Stanford Boeninger
1961 Elmer L. Morthole Evanston HS, IL 1961 Karl-Heinz Planitz Wabash College
1962 Ruth A. Hess Teaneck HS, NJ 1962 Walter F.W. Stanford Lohnes
1963 Jeanette Hillsann Thornton HS& Junior College, IL 1963 Laurence E. Wesleyan U Gemeinhardt
1964 Ruth B. Georgenitz Aurora Central HS, CO 1964 Guenter G. Montana State College Schmalz
1965 Edna H. Sek Luther Burbank HS, CA 1965 Frieda Voigt U Wisconsin
1966 Dorothea Wagner South HS, WI 1966 Lieselotte Washington U Dieckmann
1967 Leila P. Hollinger Socorro HS, NM 1967 Ursula P. Robertson Fullerton Junior College, CA 1968 John W. Karlin Hillboro Union HS, OR 1968* Arthur R. Schultz Wesleyan U
1969 John F. Bockman Tuscon HS
* The position of Third Vice-President ended after 1968. o - j Table 8 Continued
Second Vice-President
1970-71 Dorothea Bruschke Maplewood-Richmond Heights HS, MO
1972 Ruth B. Skretting Leon HS, Florida
1973 Dell J. Lewisnzie Bellaire HS, Texas 1974 Will-Robert Teetor Cornell
1975 Kenneth Keeton Collegium of Comparidve Cultures 1976 Merriam M. Moore Ridgefield HS, Connecticut
1977 Helen Lepke Kent State 1978-79 Delbert Hausman Lower Moreland HS
1980-81 Harold B. Wingard San Diego 1982 Frank M. Grittner U. Wisconsin
1983-84 Herta Stephenson St. Joseph’s College 1985-87 Robert DiDonato MIT
1988-89 Adeidine Moeller Central HS; Nebraska
1990-91 Renate Schulz U. Arizona
o oo Table 9: Elected Officers—Secretary, 1927-90 of the American Association of Teachers of German
Secretary
1927-31 Sol Liptzin City College of New York 1932 Albert W. Aron U. Illinois
1933 F.W.J. Heuser Columbia U. 1934 Hermann B. Almstedt U. Missouri 1935-37 Edward F. Hauch Hamilton College 1938-45 Charles M. Purin U. Wisconsin 1946-48 Paul Radenhausen Brooklyn Technical HS
1949-55 Emma Birkmaier U. Minnesota
1955-63 Karl-Heinz Planitz Wabash College 1964-66 Glenn E. Waas Colgate
1967-71 Theodore G. Gish U. Houston
1972-74 Edward Diller U. Oregon 1975-80 David P. Benseler Washington State U./Ohio State
1981-83 Ingeborg Hinderschiedt Purdue
1984- Jermaine D. Arendt Minneapolis 110
Women’s success in elections, particularly after 1938, was essentially guaranteed since the Constitution required that women oppose women on the ballot. One obvious flaw in the system is that the Constitution does not guarantee the type of position to which women might be elected. One can conclude that women were adequately represented in the AATG (forty percent of the nominating committee; thirty-three percent of the ballot), but they were not considered viable candidates for the presidency. Even the position of Executive Director was not filled by a women until 1986 when the current Director, Helene Zimmer-Lowe, was elected.
Between 1927 and 1992 AATG members have elected forty-one Presidents, only five have been women (Margaret McKenzie, Vassar, 1972; Herta Stephenson,
St. Joseph’s College, 1985; Adeldine Moeller, Central HS, 1988; Renate Schulz,
U. Arizona, 1990; Elizabeth Hoffmann, Nebraska Department of Education, 1992).
Not until 1949, when Emma Birkmaier (University of Minnesota) was elected, did a woman serve as Secretary of the association. Another female Secretary was not elected until 1981 (Ingeborg Hinderscheidt, Purdue). Between 1927 and 1991, the majority of women held vice-presidential positions, but they made up only thirty- seven percent of these offices.39 The list of AATG elected officers (Tables 7-9 pp. 101-109) shows a lack of female representation in top positions. The majority
(approximately seventy percent) of officers elected were college and university professors. However, most women nominated and elected were secondary school teachers (approximately seventy-two percent). Conversely, the men holding AATG offices were almost exclusively college and university faculty (approximately 87 I l l percent). The information clearly indicates that the majority of individuals directing the AATG on the national level consisted of male college professors. Conversely, the membership ratio of college teachers to secondary school teachers has decreased; 1950 2:1 in favor of college teachers; 1963 more than half secondary school teachers; 1987 4:3 in favor of secondary schools teachers.40 Based on the evidence, women were left out of the top executive positions in the AATG. The configuration of AATG officers never changed. From the start male college professors consistently held every high leadership position in the organization.
Although women were actively involved from the beginning—the New York
Chapter of High School Teachers whose membership was mainly female, is estimated at half the initial AATG membership—they were relegated to subordinate positions. In 1950, the organization had approximately 950 members, forty percent were women.41 Women were routinely members of the nominating committee, however, women did not hold a percentage of offices (between 1927 and 1949 the percentage of female officers was almost thirty percent) commensurate with their membership, nor were they elected to the presidential or secretarial positions. In the early decades of the twentieth century it would have been unlikely for the membership of the AATG to elect a woman to a position to avoid charges of sexual discrimination. Perceived merit and, more likely, politics were the primary factors in getting elected. The membership did not recognize the female members as leaders and women were excluded from the fraternity of male college professors that controlled the executive positions of the AATG. My findings do suggest a 112 strong tendency toward sexual bias within the ranks of elected officials of the organization; and they do reflect biases resulting from the "men’s club" politics of the organization. Male Germanists did not accept women as professional equals.
This prejudice is indicated by the unequal representation of women and high school teachers among the officers of the AATG, by the few papers read by women at annual meetings, and by the disproportionate number of papers published in the
Association journal. Historically women were not welcome in academe. College and university teaching were at odds with societal expectations of women, i.e. women did not need to prepare themselves to support a family, their place was in the home.42 The entrance of women into academe threatened the established male foundation. The response of male academics, and possibly many women as well, was to strengthen and reaffirm their principles by keeping women away from leadership positions where they could change and renew the profession. Changes within the profession—in the curriculum and in approaches to literature and methodology—shattered the status quo. It seems that because a significant number of highly qualified women were involved in Germanics, male Germanists, up until
1950 at least, felt the profession was in danger of becoming feminized and, thus, devalued.43 Women were not widely accepted in the social network of the profession. A report from the 1902 MLA annual meeting states: "In the evening the gentlemen of the Association were entertained by the Local Committee at the
Graduates’ Club. The ladies were received, at the residence of Professor A.S.
Cook, by the wives of the University instructors in Modem Languages." Although 113 this practice later changed due to protests led by Henriette von Klenze, how could a female Germanist ever hope to gain professional acceptance and recognition when she was also overlooked in the informal professional arena?44
It becomes apparent that the leading members of the AATG developed and perpetuated a professional "inner circle" which controlled the organization. It has been pointed out that only a small (approximately six percent) percentage of the academic community produces fifty percent of all published research; in Germanics a substantial number of scholars publishes more than once in any annual volume of the professional journals surveyed. Thus the impact of these few scholars on the profession is great. Likewise, the number of individuals who are elected over a period of years to several AATG offices and who are frequently journal editors is small. In fact, the individuals who publish frequently are more often than not
AATG officers and journal editors. These individuals make up the profession’s
"inner circle." Quite simply, the AATG was and is governed by a handful of scholars. Nominations are made by a nominating committee whose members are appointed by the president; likewise, the editor of The German Quarterly is appointed by the president, subject to the advice and consent of the Executive
Council. These scholars judge others by their own standard of achievement and
thus exclude many Germanists. Although this "inner circle" did not entirely exclude women, one had to be a well-published scholar to have a chance at being
elected to a leadership position. Until 1972, when Margaret McKenzie was elected
President, it seems one also had to be male. Many women published consistently 114 and were elected to leadership positions in other organizations (National Federation of Modem Language Teachers, Central States Modem Language Association, and local AATG chapters), yetnever received the same recognition from the AATG membership as their male counterparts. For example, Lilian Stroebe was a frequent contributor to The German Quarterly, was a member of the executive committee, and elected honorary member of the organization in 1953, yet she rarely read papers at annual meetings and was never considered for a top executive office.
Other women include Emma Birkmaier, who taught high school German, French, and Spanish and was AATG secretary from 1949 to 1955, vice-president of the
National Federation of Modem Language Teachers Associations (1952-54), and president of the Central States Modem Language Association from 1954 to 1958; and Ruth Hofrichter, who was chair of the Department of Modem Languages at
Midland College (1922-25) and later professor and chair of the Vassar German department.45
The exclusion of women from the "inner circle" of a profession has prompted many disciplines to investigate the status of their female members. There have been no studies on the status of women in Germanics, although foreign languages are included in examinations of women published in the PMLA.46 The committee, led by Lilian Stroebe in 1934, to revise the AATG constitution, specifically called women’s status in the organization into question although few longterm effects were noticed. Since the early 1970s, research in the area of
Women’s Studies in German has expanded. The development and growth of 115 Women’s studies departments has encouraged women to take a more active role in their education and professions. The broader focus of German, as demonstrated by a trend to establish "German Studies" as a discipline and the expansion of Women’s
Studies have had an impact on Women’s Studies in German. For example, Jeanette
Clausen observes that prior to 1976 almost no articles were published in German that contributed to feminist research. Yet since then articles have begun to appear with increasing regularity.47
The response to the lack of female integration in Germanics was the formation of the Coalition of Women in German (WiG) in 1976. WiG was established to meet the needs of feminist Germanists who wanted to be able to address questions and concerns of special interest to them. The group was organized as a response to growing interest in Women’s Studies in German literature and culture. Although WiG is a separate organization, since 1977 it has been affiliated with the MLA. This affiliation enhances WiG’s status as a professional organization and ensures that its members participate actively in sessions at the annual MLA convention.48 Through the MLA affiliation, WiG members are always included in the MLA convention program. Inclusion at MLA or AATG meetings also strengthens WiG politically since what is presented "only" at the annual WiG conferences could be more quickly discredited by department chairs or deans hostile to WiG’s status than could a presentation at AATG or
MLA.49 116
The members of the AATG have never denied membership or elected offices to women members; however, women have been consistently overlooked for the highest association offices and editorships until recently. Furthermore, without the establishment of WiG, women Germanists, many of whom are also AATG members, would not have a professional outlet for their concerns. These concerns include for example, feminist critiques of textbooks and other teaching materials and feminist critiques of literary works. Issues concerning women are not properly addressed by the AATG members. The proportion on women in the profession has been historically high, and is even more so today. The establishment of a feminist organization within Germanics indicates that the AATG as an institution has preserved its outmoded values. 117 1. The pedagogical section was eliminated in 1902.
2. John H. Fisher, "Remembrance and Reflection: PMLA 1884-1982," PMLA 99 (1984): 400.
3. See for example, G.W. Stone, PMLA (1958): 23-44 (75th anniversary issue); Fisher, PMLA (1984): 398-407; and Handschin, "The Teaching of the Modem Languages in the United States," U.S. Bureau of Education. Bulletin No. 3 (Washington: GPO, 1913): 26.
4. German Quarterly 1 (1928): 3-6.
5. German Quarterly 12 (1939): 20-23.
6. Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages. (New York: MLA, 1961): 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F. W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 15-54.
7. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History 215-27.
8. Zeydel, p. 360.
9. Zeydel, pp. 361-62.
10. Zeydel, p. 368.
11. Klenze, p. 3.
12. Liptzin, p. 20.
13. Klenze, p. 4.
14. Klenze, p. 5.
15. Fife, "To the Members of the American Association of Teachers of German," German Quarterly 5 (1932): 51.
16. Fife, p. 53.
17. Klenze, p. 5.
18. No programs or secretary’s reports were published until 1931.
19. Compare that percentage to the current program where half of the presenters are female. 118 20. The percentage of women chairing symposia has remained the same. In 1991 for example, of fifty-five sessions, twenty-seven are chaired by women.
21. See Weiss, pp. 215-27.
22. (New York: Macmillan, 1928, 1933).
23. (Berlin: E.S. Mittler & Sohn, 1899).
24. (Boston: Heath, 1933-34).
25. Umschau der Schriftleitung, MDU 23 (1931): 180-81.
26. Hinz began working at the University of Wisconsin in 1922 as an assistant in the German department. She received her PhD from Wisconsin in 1925 ("Translations of Goethe’s Lyrics and Poems") working with A.R. Hohlfeld. Her career was spent, due to the lack of prepared teachers and increasing number of introductory classes, training and providing adequate supplemental teaching materials to individuals after World War I. See A.B. Erast "Stella Hinz," Monatshefte 30 (1938): 332-33.
27. C.M. Purin, "A New Curriculum Commission," Monatshefte 31 (1939): 147.
28. Purin, "Report of the 5th Regular Meeting of the National Committee on Cooperative Curriculum Planning," MDU 32 (1940): 398.
29. Weiss, p. 222.
30. See for example, David P. Benseler, "The American Language Profession: Toward New Strength, Visibility, and Effectiveness as a Profession," Our Profession: Present Status and Future Directions, ed. Thomas H. Geno (Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference, 1980): 143-56.
31. Helene Zimmer-Loew, Executive Director of the AATG, letter to author, 8 December 1989.
32. "To the Members of the American Association of Teachers of German," German Quarterly 6 (1933): 104.
33. AATG Constitution Section IV, Paragraph 3.
34. In 1969 the changes to the Constitution eliminated the third vice- presidential position, and stipulated that one of the two other vice-presidential positions must go to a primary or secondary school teacher. The six executive 119 council member positions no longer needed to be equally divided between secondary and university teachers. See German Quarterly 42 (1969): 622-28.
35. "Notice to Members of the American Association of Teachers of German," German Quarterly 7 (1934): 127-8.
36. "Notice to Members of the American Association of Teachers of German," German Quarterly 7 (1934): 127.
37. Changes to the Constitution were recommended by the Committee for the Revision of the Constitution of the AATG consisting of C.R. Goedsche, Werner Neuse, H.H.J. Peisel, and Alfred Senn, then president of the AATG; see German Quarterly 30 (1957): 125-31. The Constitutional changes were voted on and approved in the 1957 annual meeting since the Constitution as printed inGerman Quarterly 31 (1958): 53 reflects these changes.
38. Decennial Index, German Quarterly 10 (1937): 3.
39. First Vice-President, fourteen percent; Second Vice-President, eighty- two percent; and Third Vice-President, forty-five percent.
40. Weiss, p. 224.
41. The German Quarterly published a membership directory in the 1950 issue.
42. See for example, American Women, ed. Durward Howes (Teaneck, NJ: Zephurus, 1974): 99; Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Womans Place: Options and Limits in Professional Careers (Berkeley: U of California P, 1971): 23.
43. See for example, Valters Nollendorfs & Carol Amess, "Graduate Programs: Looking Toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 330; Carolyn Heilbrun "The Profession and Society, 1958-83," PMLA 99 1984): 408-13.
44. On the motion of "Mrs. Camillo von Klenze" the members of the MLA resolved in 1915 that "...arrangements...at all future meeting for an informal meeting of the women members of the Association, to take place simultaneously with the men’s smoker..." See "Proceedings for 1914," PMLA 30 (1915): xviii.
45. Additional women are Bertha Reed Coffman (Chicago), Lydia Baer (Swarthmore), Hanna Hafkesbrink (Connecticut College); Else Fleissner (Wells College); Mimi Jehle (U. Illinois); Anna Jacobson (Hunter College); Ada Klett Bister (Vassar); and Erika Meyer (Mt. Holyoke). 120
46. See for example, Joan E. Hartman, Laura Morlock, Jean A. Perkins & Adrian Tinsley, "Study III - Women in Modem Language Departments 1972-73: A Report by the Commission of the Status of Women in the Profession," PMT.A 91 (1976): 124-36.
47. Jeanette Clausen documents the number of articles and dissertations that she considers a contribution to feminist research in German in her article "The Coalition of Women in German: An Interpretive History and Celebration," Women in German Yearbook I: Feminist Studies and German Culture, eds. Marianne Burkhard & Edith Waldstein (Lanham, MD: UP of America, 1985): 10.
48. Clausen, p. 9.
49. Clausen, 9. CHAPTER V
THE TEACHING STATUS OF WOMEN IN AMERICAN GERMANICS
The third aspect of women’s participation in and contribution to American
Germanics is teaching. Although some parts of a career in the professorate can be easily documented through published books and articles, teaching performance cannot. Teaching can, however, be documented by examining; 1) professional educational training; 2) academic ranking; 3) teaching experience; 4) the importance of one’s contributions to the profession; 5) the degree of acceptance accorded a teacher by colleagues; and 6) student evaluations. This chapter initially investigates the general teaching status of women on German faculties in the United States.
Comprehensive histories of individual women in Germanics are yet to be written.
As a beginning, I provide career examples to demonstrate specific professional contributions by women and to prove that it is justifiable to include women, those who can be credited with major accomplishments as well as those who pursued less active careers, in histories of Germanics. This chapter illustrates two women’s careers, women whose innovative methods and ideas have influenced the way
German is now taught in the United States. Finally, an interview is included which presents one woman’s observations on her career and the profession.
121 122
In order to assess women’s teaching status, available data were gathered and evaluated regarding doctoral degrees earned and academic ranking. "Teaching status" refers to the proportion of women in the profession, degrees held, and academic ranking. The purpose is to establish an accurate approximation in percentage terms of women in Germanics between 1860 and the present and to determine the academic ranks they held. The primary problem in determining women’s teaching status is the fragmentary nature of records. Many schools and/or departments did not keep catalogs or records; therefore, much information regarding faculty rank and teaching loads is unavailable.1
The question whether one’s standing as a scholar or her teaching ability is more highly regarded depends mainly on the goals of the institution where she is employed. In addition, the nature of the department also helps determine teaching or research emphasis. Doctoral degree granting departments will doubtless list research as the primary aim, while other departments emphasize closer contact with students. Generally, the career intent of faculty in all disciplines is teaching. In
"Teaching Faculty in Universities and Four-Year Colleges," the authors (p. 16) establish that ninety-eight percent of all faculty in 1963 specified teaching as their primary assignment.2 Furthermore, in another study Martin Trow and Oliver
Fulton (p. 42) point out: "...the American academic system as a whole is primarily a teaching system. Any notion that teaching generally takes second place to research is certainly not borne out. "3 123 One determinant for academic promotion is the level of training, i.e. degree earned. A doctoral degree was not a necessary qualification for college teaching in the early decades of the century.4 (Although to win a permanent appointment at a prominent university the PhD was customary.5) Even as late as 1963 only fifty-one percent of all teaching faculty held the doctorate.6 In German the percentage of full-time faculty holding the PhD is higher than the average in all academic disciplines; in 1944-457 eighty-six percent of all faculty in Germanics held the PhD; in 1989-90 almost ninety-four (93.7) percent had earned the doctorate. Although the degree itself is no guarantee of teaching ability or of scholarly achievement, a doctoral degree nevertheless does offer a certain assurance that an individual has the basic knowledge and training in study and methods of investigation which are essential for a college teacher. Academic ranking is influenced and determined by many factors such as seniority, degree(s) held, publications, and teaching ability. Although academic achievement is often measured by publications, rank, and salary, Lucille Pollard demonstrates that individuals holding the PhD are more likely to receive promotional opportunities than individuals without an advanced degree.8 Since the doctorate is a determining factor in obtaining academic employment and earning advancement, I collected and evaluated figures to determine the number of female doctoral recipients in
Germanics (Table 10 p. 125). This percentage is then compared to the percentages of women employed in each academic rank from 1938-39 to 1948-49 and for comparison in 1989-90. 124
According to the National Research Council between 1920 and 1949 more doctorates—approximately 21 percent—were awarded to women in arts and humanities (English language and literature, foreign languages and literatures, philosophy, arts and professions, religion-theology and miscellaneous professions) than in any other discipline. The number of doctorates for women during the same time period for all foreign languages and literatures never fell below twenty-three percent: 1920-24, twenty-four percent; 1925-29, thirty-three percent; 1930-34, thirty-four percent; 1935-39, twenty-seven percent; 1940-44, thirty-one percent; and
1945-49, twenty-eight percent.9 David P. Benseler’s "A Comprehensive
Bibliography of American Doctoral Dissertations on German, Austria, and
Switzerland, 1861-1972" provided material from which I was able to extract the number of American doctorates in German awarded to women between 1861 and
1939. Although the percentages calculated from Benseler’s bibliography do provide some information on female degree recipients, the figures can represent only estimates since many Americans—particularly women who were unable to attend
American graduate schools until the early decades of the twentieth century—received doctoral degrees from European universities. In German the percentage of PhDs awarded to women (in all areas of German)10 steadily increased between 1861 and 1939 (1861-1899 ten percent; 1900-09 nearly eleven percent (10.9%); 1910-19 seventeen percent; 1920-29 nineteen percent; 1930-39 twenty percent). Between 1940-49 the percentage dropped slightly to nearly nineteen percent (18.9%) (Table 10 p. 125). Table 10: Number and Percentage of Doctoral Degrees Granted by American Universities to Women in Germanics, 1861-1949
Year Total Number of PhD’s Number of Women PhD’s Percentage of Women PhD’s
1861-1899 109 11 10% 1900-1909 164 18 10.9% 1910-1919 214 37 17.2%
1920-1929 152 29 19% 1930-1939 479 97 20.2% 1940-1949 558 106 18.9%
to 126 The slight decline in doctoral degrees awarded to women during the 1940s may be linked to the increased marriage and birth rates following World War II, indicating that more women were remaining at home, instead of continuing or starting a career. In fact, it has been noted that women’s employment in academe reflects the overall marriage trend.11 The number of female doctoral recipients also continued to increase between 1964-65 and 1983-84. In fact, Monatshefte surveys reveal that from the mid 1970s the majority of graduate students reported in
German are female, and, beginning in 1975-76, the majority of those finishing
PhDs were female. More recently, women received almost sixty (59.6) percent of the doctorates awarded in Germanic languages and literature in 1989.12 Although an increasing number of women are awarded the doctorate, the proportion of female degree recipients has always exceeded the proportion of women faculty.
As it is not my purpose here to examine the administrative policies of university employment and promotion, rank here applies only to academic positions held by faculty members within a department during a specific academic year.
Rank distribution tables in this chapter contain only information on full-time teaching staff—professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and instructor.
Although many women faculty may be represented as part-time faculty, visiting professors, emeritae, tutors, lecturers, teaching assistants or fellows, these data are not included since the "Personalia" directories of Monatshefte do not record such
information consistently; the information there is dependent on responding chairpersons. In order to estimate the ratio of employed female Germanists, 127
"Personalia" listings from Monatshefte were surveyed. Since publication of the annual "Personalia" directory began only in 1938-39, the estimated percentage of female Germanists is based on the directories published between 1938-39 and
1948-49. I took each annual "Personalia" directory and determined the institutions which responded regularly (i.e. at least nine out of the ten year period). I then calculated the total number of full-time faculty and the number of female full-time faculty during each academic year. From these figures I was able to calculate a percentage for female Germanists for the ten year period. Although the
"Personalia" lists are flawed—as they record only those departments which actually respond to an annual survey—they represent the only available data on the number of Germanists employed at American colleges and universities. Moreover, there will always exist the possibility that an individual, either male or female, will be counted more than once in faculty registers. Obviously these lists contain information only from the schools that responded, but because the figures represent a mean percentage, it is reasonable to assume that the percentage of female
Germanists will be essentially the same between responding and non-responding schools. The results can be seen in Table 3 (pp. 50-56). For example, in 1938-39 the total number of faculty listed is 212, the percentage of women in that academic year is only nine percent. In 1989-90, women comprised almost thirty-six (35.6) percent of the 432 faculty members listed. While the number of total faculty between 1938-89 and 1989-90 increased more than twofold, the percentage of female faculty members grew at twice the rate of the overall faculty. One possible 128 conclusion is that faculty openings are increasingly being filled by women. Due to the increase mentioned above in doctoral production by women, more females are doubtless applicants. Women may also be remaining in positions longer. In addition, it may be likely that there is an increase in non-tenured positions which, because of salary and prestige, few men want. Nollendorfs and Amess (p. 321) point out that the number of non-tenure track positions rose from thirteen percent in
1981 to fifteen percent in 1984.13 Nevertheless, the number of faculty positions held by women is—and is becoming—even more disproportionate to the number of female PhD recipients. During the 1940s for example, women received almost nineteen percent of all doctorates awarded in German; the total number of faculty in
Germanics during this decade was 2405; the percentage of female faculty at that time was seventeen percent. In 1989-90 women were awarded nearly sixty percent of doctoral degrees in German, yet were only thirty-six percent of the total (432) faculty. Generally between 1950 and 1989, from two to fifty percent of the female doctorates were not hired into the profession. The number of women on Germanics faculties has increased dramatically, however there is a significant number of female doctorates left unaccounted for. Obviously, at times a glut of qualified candidates exists for only a few positions, yet "the rise in the numbers of women obtaining higher degrees coincided with the lower demand for their services in academic institutions."14 Regardless of how good a woman’s qualifications are, she is not being hired at the same rate as her male colleagues and certainly not at 129 the rate one would expect based on the data of completed doctorates (by gender) in the discipline.
Women who actually do receive an academic appointment are not being promoted at the same rate as their male counterparts. The percentage of women in each academic rank was calculated for all forty institutions for each academic year
(Table lip. 129). In 1938-39, for example, fifty-one full professors are listed, only one of whom is female (two percent); of twenty-eight associate professors, only two are women (seven percent); of forty-eight assistant professors and eighty-five instructors, seven (fifteen percent) and nine (eleven percent) women respectively. In order to determine whether women’s rank distribution has changed, percentages for 1938-39 were compared with those for 1989-90. In
1989-90, women comprise twenty percent of full professors; thirty-four percent of associate professors; forty-eight percent of assistant professors; and sixty-four percent of instructors.
Table 11: Comparison of Female Faculty Rank 1939/40 and 1989/90
Rank 1939/40 1989/90
Total Women Percentage Total Women Percentage
Full 71 3 4% 199 39 20% Professor
Associate 34 3 9% 122 42 34% Professor
Assistant 71 17 24% 92 44 48% Professor
Instructor 95 18 19% 28 18 64% 130
The percentages for women still show a low proportion of female full professors, and a high percentage of women at the assistant professor and instructor levels
(Table 12 p. 131). The total percentage of women on Germanics faculties did increase between 1938-39 and 1989-90, however, women remain concentrated in the lower ranks. Table 12: Number and Percentage of Women by Rank by Year, 1938/39 - 1948/49 and 1989/90
Full Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor Total Women Percent Total Women Percent Total Women Percent Total Women Percent of of of of Women Women Women Women 1938/39 51 1 2% 28 2 7% 48 7 15% 85 9 11%
1939/40 71 3 4% 34 3 9 % 71 17 24% 95 18 19% 1940/41 69 2 3% 31 1 3% 69 16 23% 80 9 11% 1941/42 69 2 3% 34 2 6 % 75 15 20% 82 14 17% 1942/43 70 3 4% 35 3 9 % 71 13 18% 66 14 21% 1943/44 63 1 2% 28 5 18% 54 11 20% 51 22 43% 1944/45 62 1 2% 35 5 14% 62 14 23% 49 11 22% 1945/46 62 1 2% 44 7 16% 55 8 15% 69 22 32%
1946/47 70 0 0% 54 8 15% 64 7 11% 129 55 43% 1947/48 68 1 1% 66 8 12% 72 16 22% 145 52 36%
1948/49 76 3 4% 65 7 11% 75 13 17% 117 40 34%
Average 2% 11% 19% 26% Percentage of Women
1989/90 199 39 20 % 122 42 32% 92 44 48% 28 18 64% 132
Nollendorfs and Amess (p. 329) note that the lack of teaching experience, publications, or professional commitment are not factors keeping women from academic positions. Several conclusions therefore, can be drawn from these data regarding the low percentage and ranking of female Germanists: 1) women are less mobile than their male counterparts; 2) they are more willing to accept temporary and part-time positions and lower pay; and 3) male faculty members discriminate and are biased against women.15
The total number of faculty and women for each academic year was also calculated according to institutional type (Tables 13-15 pp. 134-136). An examination of institutional type was performed to determine whether women in
Germanics, compared to faculty women in general, were "...concentrated in a few
’women’s sectors’ within the higher education system..." as Susan Carter maintains.16 Carter argues that few women were employed at all-male schools, and that most were found on the faculties of private women’s colleges or teachers’ colleges and normal schools.17 Thus the forty designated schools were divided into the following classifications:18
Private four-vear women’s colleges—private four-year colleges providing the baccalaureate degree, enrolling only female students; private four-vear men’s colleges—private four-year college granting the baccalaureate degree, enrolling only male students; public universities—coeducational universities consisting of two or more colleges or schools receiving public/state funding; private universities—coeducational universities consisting of two or more colleges or 133 schools independent of state or local government funding; Land grant colleges—schools receiving a regular endowment from the 1862 Morrill Act.19
Most women in Germanics between 1938-39 and 1948-49 are found at private women’s colleges (average seventy-three percent) and the fewest at private men’s colleges (average four percent). Female faculty at the other institutional types are equally distributed—public universities (average fourteen percent), private universities (average fifteen percent), and land grant colleges (average eleven percent). Over the years the distribution between institutional types has changed only slightly (Table 16 p. 137). In 1989-90 the proportion of female faculty employed at all institutional types still shows a high percentage of female faculty employed at women’s colleges (sixty-seven percent) although women seem more fairly distributed in the other institutional types (men’s colleges, thirty-six percent; former land-grant colleges, thirty-four percent; private universities, thirty-one percent; public universities, twenty-eight percent). Table 13: Number and Percentage of Faculty Women in Germanics Based on Institutional Type: Four Year Women’s and Men’s Colleges
Four Year Women’s Colleges Four Year Men’s Colleges Year Faculty Total Total Number Percentage Year Faculty Total Total Number Percentage of Women of Women of Women of Women 1938-39 20 16 80 1938-39 39 0 0 1939-40 20 16 80 1939-40 27 1 3 1940-41 22 16 73 1940-41 27 0 0 1941-42 22 15 68 1941-42 29 1 3 1942-43 18 13 72 1942-43 30 1 3 1943-44 16 13 81 1943-44 21 2 10 1944-45 17 13 76 1944-45 21 1 4 1945-46 19 15 79 1945-46 24 1 4 1946-47 12 9 75 1946-47 30 1 3 1947-48 19 14 74 1947-48 29 2 6 1948-49 18 12 67 1948-49 29 2 6 Table 14: Number and Percentage of Faculty Women in Germanics Based on Institutional Type: Public and Private Universities
Public Universities Private Universities Year Faculty Total Total Number Percentage Year Faculty Total Total Number Percentage of Women of Women of Women of Women 1938-39 94 4 4 1938-39 31 3 10 1939-40 134 13 10 1939-40 42 4 10 1940-41 123 10 8 1940-41 44 5 11 1941-42 127 10 8 1941-42 42 5 12 1942-43 114 11 10 1942-43 37 4 11 1943-44 91 15 16 1943-44 35 7 20 1944-45 101 9 9 1944-45 34 4 12 1945-46 106 12 11 1945-46 39 6 15 1946-47 164 39 24 1946-47 52 12 23 1947-48 192 41 21 1947-48 54 12 22 1948-49 174 33 19 1948-49 55 9 16
03 Table 15: Number and Percentage of Faculty Women in Germanics Based on Institutional Type: Land Grant Colleges
Land Grant Colleges Year Faculty Total Total Number Percentage of Women of Women 1938-39 32 2 6 1939-40 51 5 10 1940-41 45 4 9 1941-42 41 3 7 1942-43 39 4 10 1943-44 35 2 6 1944-45 34 3 9 1945-46 40 4 10 1946-47 54 10 19 1947-48 55 8 15 1948-49 57 6 11
o\ 137
Table 16: Comparison of Women’s Institutional Affiliation: 1938/39 and 1989-90 1939-40 1989-90 Institution Total Number Percent Total Number Percent of of of of Women Women Women Women
Four Year 20 16 80% 24 16 67% Women’s Colleges
Four Year 27 1 4% 39 14 36% Men’s Colleges
Private 134 13 10% 58 18 31% Universities
Public 42 4 10% 230 64 28% Universities
Land Grant 51 5 10% 90 31 34% Colleges
Average rank distribution for each institutional type between 1938-39 and
1948-49 varied greatly (Table 17 p. 139). Female full professors are found almost exclusively at the women’s colleges—36.8 percent; private universities averaged approximately one and a half percent whereas public universities averaged less than one percent for full professors.No female full professors were found at private men’s or land grant colleges. It is surprising that there are no female full professors at land grant schools since these institutions historically offered more academic career opportunities to women.20 Rank distribution for each institutional type in 1989-90 (Table 18 p. 140) is quite different; the highest percentage of female full professors is found at private men’s and women’s colleges, thirty-seven and fifty-seven percent respectively. The percentages of female full professors at other schools shows an increase in full professors (seventeen percent at private 138 universities; twenty-two percent at land grant schools; fourteen percent at public universities) Table 17: Total Number and Percentage of Faculty Women by Rank According to Institutional Type, 1938-39 through 1948-49
Full Professor Associate Assistant Instructor Institution Total Number Percent Total Number Percent Total Number Percent Total Number Percent of of of of of of of of Women Women Women Women Women Women Women Women
Four Year 38 14 36.8% 47 36 76.6% 44 38 86.4% 59 50 84.7% Women’s Colleges
Four Year 102 0 0 43 0 0 55 2 3.6% 106 10 9.4% Men’s Colleges
Private 130 2 1.5% 68 4 5.9% 100 52 52% 168 43 25.6% Universities
Public 352 2 <1% 181 8 4.4% 374 20 5.3% 514 140 27.2% Universities
Land Grant 107 0 0 115 3 <1% 143 25 17.5% 121 23 19% Colleges
VO Table 18: Number and Percentage of Faculty Women by Rank According to Institutional Type, 1989-90
Full Professor Associate Assistant Instructor Institution Total Number Percent Total Number Percent Total Number Percent Total Number Percent of of of of of of of of Women Women Women Women Women Women Women Women Four Year 7 4 57% 9 7 77.7% 5 2 40% 3 3 100% Women’s Colleges
Four Year 16 6 37.5% 4 1 25% 14 5 35.7% 5 2 40% Men’s Colleges
Private 29 5 17.2% 17 4 23.5% 9 6 66.6% 3 3 100% Universities
Public 107 15 14% 74 24 32.4% 44 22 50% 5 3 60% Universities
Land Grant 40 9 22.5% 18 6 33.33% 20 9 45% 12 7 58% Colleges
o 141
The persisting characteristic for women in the early decades of the twentieth century, which duplicates women’s academic employment in general, is the uneven distribution of women among the institutional types as well as the clustering of women on the lower rungs of the academic ladder.21 Although the number of women on German faculties is increasing, a disproportionate number of them are employed at lower academic rankings. This low ratio suggests that, although women are receiving appointments, they are not promoted as rapidly as their male counterparts. The percentages I calculated from Monatshefte directories for 1989-
90 show that women in Germanics are currently employed by all types of institutions (women’s colleges, sixty-seven percent; men’s colleges, thirty-six percent; former land-grant colleges, thirty-four percent; private universities, thirty-one percent; public universities, twenty-eight percent).
Women in Germanics are now represented at all institutional types; however, their academic rank has not significantly changed (sixteen percent of full professors; thirty-one percent of associate professors; forty-six percent of assistant professors; and sixty-four percent of instructors). Women’s persistently low academic status indicates not only the inability, but perhaps too the lack of desire and prejudice, of the profession to integrate them successfully. Too often academic employment has operated using a closed faculty selection, or "old-boy network," where positions are filled by individuals who knew someone in or had prior professional contact with the hiring department. The purpose of this type of internal hiring is to maintain the prestige of the department as well as the status 142 quo.22 In a article on the profession, Carolyn Heilbrun remarks that women entering into an academic career "...paid the price of being not as other women, of forbidding themselves to explore the ramifications of their gender. They paid the price of a loneliness difficult either to imagine or describe: I can scarcely, in these days of professional female friendships, even remember that isolation. And we took that isolation wholly for granted: that was the worst of it."23 Due to the male dominance in the profession, it could be speculated that women did not form then- own networks because they wanted to blend quietly into a department and disassociate themselves from anything specifically related to women. Furthermore, women may have discounted networking’s value to their career. In a major study on academic employment, Caplow and McGee (p.Ill) write: "Women tend to be discriminated against in the academic profession, not because they have low prestige but because they are outside the prestige system entirely..." In Germanics, the number of women finishing PhDs is increasing, yet they seem not in demand for employment. In an anecdote, that depicts the mood of many men in academic departments, Heilbrun notes (p. 409) that "...Charles Everett
[Columbia],...remarked on the receipt of an application from a woman professor:
’We don’t want a woman in Hamilton Hall, do we?’ And the application was promptly lost." Although women must meet the same requirements as their male counterparts for successful completion of doctoral programs, for employment, promotion, and tenure, their skills are frequently not recognized. This low demand suggests that many departments maintain an internal hiring policy. It may also be 143 noted that female applicants are judged by different standards than their male counterparts. For example, Nollendorfs and Araess cite (p. 329) "the traditional role of women as wife and mother" as the main detriment to their looking for, or obtaining, permanent jobs. The balance between marriage and family is rarely an issue for men, but that it is at times a concern when hiring and promoting women indicates sexual bias within the profession.
Historically, only in women’s colleges have women consistently risen to the top of individual disciplines and the apex of the teaching hierarchy. In the early decades of the twentieth century these colleges were receptive to women faculty and were attractive to women because they provided an intellectual environment and the possibility for advancement and leadership comparable to what male academicians had elsewhere.24 Women’s colleges may have wielded substantial influence on the status of academic women. The reputation of the eastern women’s colleges was excellent. It was, therefore, beneficial for these colleges to hire only the best female faculty. The schools provided their women faculty with an environment for productive teaching and research. In this way, the prestige of the schools increased as did the reputation of its women scholars. It is unlikely that these same top female scholars would have risen to equivalent academic standing in the biased atmosphere of co-educational or in all-male colleges. A cursory glance at professional journal indices up to 1950 as well as the AATG annual meeting reports confirms that many of the women in Germanics publishing articles or reading papers (between 1850 and 1950) were employed by women’s colleges. Marian 144
Whitney and Lilian Stroebe are two examples of the careers of female Germanists employed at women’s colleges. Their individual career highlights are included here to establish that female Germanists have had an influence on the development of
Germanics in their own institutions as well as on the profession itself.
Marion Whitney began her Vassar career in 1905 as head of the German department after teaching foreign languages at New Haven High School. Her academic career was devoted to strengthening and improving German language instruction in the United States. By her retirement in 1929, Whitney could claim credit for instituting many of the changes in language teaching at Vassar, establishing a strong language department, as well as introducing textbooks into the curriculum which were designed specifically for American students of German.25
From the start Whitney attempted to reorganize and improve the quality of departmental offerings. The ongoing methodological debate which began around
1900 revolved around the use of either the grammar-translation method or the natural or direct method. From the beginning foreign or second languages were taught using the grammar-translation method employed in teaching Latin and Greek.
This method stressed memorizing formal grammar and syntactical rules and applying these mles to translating texts from German to English. By the late nineteenth century, the natural or direct method—which was primarily an oral method—was introduced. The direct method in its purest form called for the exclusive use—conversation, grammar explanations, reading—of the foreign language in the classroom. To be sure, there were other methodologies used during 145 the early decades of the twentieth century, yet, the majority of teachers aligned themselves with either the grammar-translation method or the direct method. Based on the number of articles on the use of the direct method, this methodology was popular with many Germanists.26 Speaking and listening skills were then used as a basis for reading. In practice, the reading text was used as a foundation for speaking and writing. At Vassar, for example, each German language class—with the exception of grammatical explanations—was conducted entirely in the foreign language. Mastering speaking and writing skill could be accomplished by using high interest materials and techniques as well as constant student involvement. For example, in a beginning course, the reading texts were used in the classroom to stimulate conversation, dialogue, and narration. Whitney’s ideas on language methodologies, specifically the use of the current "direct method", in which grammar, aural comprehension, oral practice, and composition contribute to the student’s reading ability, were innovative.27 In fact, many of her ideas were subsequently published in the Modem Foreign Language Study (1927).
The Modem Foreign Language Study was founded in 1924 and financed by the Carnegie Corporation and the American Council on Education. The Study communicated the need for investigation of teachers of modem foreign languages and their place in American education. Contributions of the Study include an analysis of foreign language teaching objectives, suggested methods to reach instructional goals, standardization of tests, compilation of word/idiom lists for 146 curriculum purposes, selection of curriculum content, and a bibliography on modem language teaching.28
Connected with her desire to revise the Vassar curriculum were Whitney’s numerous editions of textbooks, edited and published with Lilian Stroebe. Although several textbooks were available to German teachers at this time, the originality of the Whitney/Stroebe texts lay in their design.29 Available textbooks included
Follen’s Deutsches Lesebuch fur Anfanger (1826), which consisted of extracts from
German prose with superscripted numbers to clarify word order30, Hermann
Bokum’s An Introduction to the Study of the German Language, which contained interlinear English translations, as well as B.J. Vos’s Essentials of German (New
York: Holt, 1913); G.J. Adler’s Ollendorf s New Method of Learning to Read.
Write, and Speak German (New York, 1845); Emil Otto’s German Conversation-
Grammar: A Practical Method of Learning the German Language (Boston: Kohler,
1901); Franz Ahn’s A New Practical and Easy Method of Learning German
(Philadelphia, 1859); and W.H. Woodbury’s A New Method of Learning the
German Language. Embracing both the Analytic and Synthetic Modes of Instruction
(New York: Newman, 1851). According to Zeydel and Bagster-Collins, the format of the early language textbooks was crowded, the design dull, and the exercises ineffective. Zeydel (p. 337) notes; "As in most of the textbooks of that time, the printing is crowded and unattractive. How an average modem college freshman with no knowledge of German would be baffled by the difficulty of the language and thought!" Yet in spite of these inadequacies, the textbooks used in the early 147 years of the twentieth century maintained the grammar-translation model.31 In addition, modem language textbooks were either published in Germany or directly based on those written abroad.32 According to Whitney and Stroebe, none of the existing textbooks introduces or provides a background in German culture and social history, an essential element for American students. Whitney, however, designed her texts—Advanced German Composition (1910), Easy German
Composition (1915), and A Brief Course in German (1926)—to include German cultural and social elements; items intended to meet primarily the needs of
American students learning German. The texts read in the classroom were discussed with regard to the German people and their culture, providing the students with a background knowledge of Germany which she felt essential for advanced work. Grammar, vocabulary and literature were dealt with systematically. Each textbook included model texts containing "...literary subjects of interest and value to students, and at the same time illustrating a special point of grammar." (16) Each textbook was tested at Vassar as well as other colleges (Mt.
Holyoke and Wellseley) before publication. By far the most significant text published by Whitney/Stroebe was their Geschichte der deutschen Literatur
(1913).33 While teaching literature courses at Vassar, Whitney and Stroebe began to realize that "...there was no history of German literature written in German suited to the needs of American students." 34 Geschichte der deutschen Literatur was written for teachers who wanted to use German exclusively in the classroom.
It contains simple vocabulary and treats literature from the beginnings to the 148 present, emphasizing the most important periods and authors for American students.
The introductory chapters, illustrating the historical events and changes in social
and economic conditions which influence literature were an entirely new feature
since the literary histories "issued in Germany for Germans are written in very difficult and condensed language and they also assume a knowledge of German history and German social conditions which we cannot expect our students to
have."35
Little emphasis was given at Vassar at this time to career training.36 In
fact, articles on teacher training did not appear in many language journals until
around 1910 when the notion of teacher training requirements began to be
popular.37 Many of the article authors felt that developing teaching ability in
addition to a thorough knowledge of the subject matter needed to be stressed.
Programs that included instruction in language and literature, as well as the
psychology of modem language learning, the aims and development of modem
language teaching, and useful teaching techniques were most valuable. In addition
to completing a pedagogically oriented teacher curriculum, future teachers also
needed to learn to apply materials in a practical setting. Practice teaching under the
direct supervision of a qualified instructor and class visitation were suggested
options. The importance of study abroad programs and language clubs and houses
was also stressed since such programs allowed students to increase their general
language skills. Moreover, there should be a qualified representative of a language
department responsible for teacher training. Whitney was in the forefront in 149 supporting and initiating teacher training programs at Vassar that utilized the aforementioned concepts.
Initially Whitney lectured informally to seniors interested in secondary language teaching. In 1908, conversation classes were introduced which were designed as a preparation for future teachers.38 The advanced conversation courses focussed on geography, history, and culture in order to promote a better understanding of
Germany. In addition, part of the advanced conversation class was spent in practice teaching. In a progressive move, Vassar offered in 1916 a postgraduate year for German teachers. Students from Vassar as well as from other colleges lived together with the German faculty in a "German House" where German was used exclusively. Stroebe writes;
This year seemed to be an excellent substitute for a year in Germany. Quite apart from the fact that nobody could go to Germany in those years, for prospective teachers it was more advantageous, as nowhere in Germany could they have received a training planned for them in detail as teachers of German in the United States. However, owing to the First World War, this postgraduate year had to be given up very soon. (29)
This substitute year abroad seems all the more progressive when one realizes that the Junior Year in Europe did not begin until shortly before World War II.39
Whitney greatly advanced the methods of teacher training at Vassar. Her methods were unprecedented considering the status of teacher training programs in the
United States. In addition, she was highly respected in the profession, having 150 served as a vice-president of the Modem Language Association (1918-20), council member of the American Association of University Professors (1920-27), on the
National Research Council (1931-35), as chair of the Board of Examiners in
German of the College Entrance Examination Board, and a member of the Modem
Foreign Language Study Committee (1924-27).
Invariably linked with Whitney’s ideas of incorporating practical usage of
German and teacher training is the Middlebury Summer School. The summer school was initially formulated by Whitney and her colleague Lilian Stroebe in
1911. Stroebe remembers;
The idea of the Summer School was bom on a beautiful spring day in 1911 in an old apple orchard on a lonely, winding, little cross-country road... While resting from a bicycle ride... Professor Whitney and I planned the new program in detail... No college at that time would have been willing to open its summer session to ideas that were absolutely new and had not proved their value, but we found an ideal place in the Berkshires and I rented it for the summer of 1912. The first official German Summer School was founded and financed by Stroebe at the Taconic School in Lakeville, Connecticut in 1912.
The following summer the school was held at Highland Hall in Holidaysburg,
Pennsylvania. Once the ideas had been tested, Stroebe set out to find a college that would agree to support a summer foreign language program. Then Middlebury
College President John Thomas was contacted regarding making the language school a part of the Middlebury summer program. In 1915, Stroebe opened the 151 first college foreign language school at Middlebury College. The summer school was intended not only as a substitute for study abroad, but also as a permanent addition to the modem language curriculum. The most significant objective made by Stroebe in designing the summer school was the exclusive opportunity for teachers to work on methods of teaching foreign languages in American colleges and schools, a subject which could not be sufficiently met in a foreign study program. The Middlebury Summer School was the first of its kind.
Its chief objectives were to enable each student to understand and speak the foreign language (German) with fluency and ease and to give each individual the opportunity to think, hear, and speak only German. In "Summer Schools for
Modem Languages" (Education 39 [1918-19]: 305-16), Stroebe outlines her organizational goals: isolation, concentration, and coordination. Normally, students were to be housed with native-speaking faculty members with whom they could constantly practice speaking the foreign language. Use of any other language was to be avoided and extracurricular activities—lectures, readings, church services, and social events—were held entirely in the foreign language. Students enrolled in the summer school were allowed to study only subjects within the language department.
This rule ensured that there would be no break in the continuity of foreign language usage. The content of the courses encouraged self-study and self-activity.
Basically the courses were divided into groups: conversation, composition, literature, phonetics, and methodology. Stroebe points out (p. 356) in her article,
"Organization and Management of Summer Schools for Foreign Language" 152
(Education 39 [1918-19]: 356-66), the most important course in the summer curriculum is methodology. The problems discussed in the course are those Stroebe considers vital to successful teaching and include; "...choice of books, the building up of the active and passive vocabulary, the different methods of handling and vitalizing the reading matter, the presentation of grammatical matter and of oral and written exercises, the art of asking questions, and the way of making the best use of time in the classroom."
The Middlebury German program was extremely successful, and Stroebe published several articles demonstrating the accomplishments of the school.
These articles include, "The Summer School as a Wartime Substitute for Study
Abroad" (Bulletin of the New England Modem Language Association 1918);
"Organization and Management of Summer Schools for Modem Languages"
(Education 39 [1919]: 356-66); "The Use of Pictures as Illustrative Material in
Modem Language Teaching" (Education 43 [1923]: 363-72); "The Real Knowledge of a Foreign Country" (MU 5 [1920-21]: 38-44, 93-101); "How to Plan a
Grammar Lesson" (Monatshefte 21 [1929]: 10); "How to Prepare a Reading
Lesson" (Monatshefte 21 [1929]: 42); and "How to Prepare a Review Lesson"
(Monatshefte 22 [1930]: 13-18). The content of these articles summarizes Stroebe’s pedagogical methods, both for the summer school and also in her courses at Vassar.
She emphasizes how to present reading material and how to stimulate natural conversations in the foreign language. For example, when working with a reading selection, mechanical questions (e.g. "Was sagt es, Was macht sie?") should be 153 eliminated. Instead questions should reflect the content of the text, for example how it relates to other texts the class may have read. In addition questions should be formulated to bring in a student’s personal experiences in relation to the topic.
Another original suggestion is in using current foreign language newspapers and magazines to stimulate discussions and simulate the foreign culture. The basic tenets of the summer school according to Stroebe are to gain fluency in the modem language and its culture. Her plan was to offer in the United States what teachers get abroad—"a well-conducted course of study, life in a distinctly foreign atmosphere, and daily intercourse with educated foreigners. h40
The Middlebury summer language school expanded in the following years to include French (1916), Spanish (1917), and Italian (1932), becoming "the acknowledged center of foreign language instruction during the summer months."41
When the United States entered World War I, German was essentially eliminated from the American high school and college curriculum. The German language and its teachers suffered because support of the German language and its culture was seen as pro-German sentiment and allegiance to Germany. Due to American propaganda against Germany and its language, the German school at Middlebury was also discontinued. Unfortunately, American educators only considered the immediate situation, they did not anticipate or evaluate the longterm effects of excluding German from the curriculum. By the late 1920s there was an increasing demand for well-trained German teachers; scientists, economists, and historians did not have the proper language training needed for advanced work. In 1927, at Mt. 154
Holyoke, Stroebe was able to begin conducting another German summer session; by
1928 the attendance nearly doubled, indicating the need for German.42 In 1931, under the direction of Ernst Feise, the Middlebury German school was reinstated and continues today.
In addition to the Summer School, Stroebe developed elementary readers designed to allow the beginning student to achieve rapid and continuous reading.
These readers were selections from modem Unterhaltunesliteratur. Jugendbiicher. and Detektiveeschichten edited to eliminate syntactical problems and to provide a limited, but current working vocabulary for the student. The goal of each text was to allow the beginning student to acquire and build a basic German vocabulary which would provide a foundation for future study in German. Lilian Stroebe advanced foreign language pedagogy through her numerous articles, grammars, and editions of texts. However, her pioneering effort in the area of teacher education and the study of modem languages was the establishment of the Middlebury summer language school.
Previous chapters of this study identified traditional aspects of an academic career—publication, teaching, and involvement in professional organizations.
Portions of individual careers have been used to illustrate women’s involvement in each of these areas in Germanics. Women have had less access to academic employment than men and have shown that women in Germanics have been, as a group, underrepresented and undervalued. Data can be compiled on the number of women employed in a profession, the ranks held, degrees earned, and the number 155 of publications, but these statistics do not document a woman’s experience in the profession. One of the ways to assemble data on the female experience is through biographies and interviews. The following biography and interview with Helen
Adolf portrays a highly accomplished teacher and scholar. The interview is included here to provide an example of the type of oral history that needs to be developed to directly document the history of the profession as well as to illustrate one individual’s experience as a female Germanist.
Helen Adolf was bom in Vienna in 1895. After entering the University of
Vienna to study Romance philology, she left to enroll full time at art school.
Despite a strong inclination for becoming an artist, discussions at art school forced her to question herself and her artistic talent. She finally decided her talent was insufficient to continue. Following volunteer work at a Red Cross hospital during
World War I, she returned to the university to study German literature and philology. In 1923 she received her doctorate, graduating with honors. Between
1923 and 1926 she nursed her father until his death. At that time (1926) she returned to the university to do further research in Germanic philology working with Max Jellinek, Elise Richter, and Karl Beth. In 1937 she published
Worteeschichtliche Studien zum Leib/Seele Problem, intended to be her
Habilitationsschrift. a work that would enable her to teach in a German or Austrian university. The rise of anti-semitism and Hitler’s arrival in Austria ended her academic career in Europe. Adolf immigrated to the United States in 1939. That year she taught at the
Foxcroft school in Philadelphia, moving to Colorado to teach French at a private school in Colorado Springs. Following advice from teachers in Colorado, Adolf returned to Pennsylvania and began to study Spanish. Her first university teaching position was at the Pennsylvania State University (Altoona Campus) teaching
German, French, and Spanish. At this time she met Philip A. Shelley, who invited her to join the German faculty at the State College campus. Adolf taught at Penn
State from 1946 to 1963 when she retired. She has led an active life; her publications and her own creative work confirm her originality as a scholar.
Former student and friend Sheema Buehne writes (p.7); "The creative efforts of her early years enriched and extended her vision; and in the course of her teaching she has tried to stimulate her women students to greater scholarly achievement, for she has always felt that woman has something particular to contribute to the academic world." Although Buehne indicates that women have "something particular" to give to the profession, she never indicates exactly what this is.
I interviewed Adolf on 21 November 1988 in State College,
Pennsylvania.43 Initially the interview was to focus on the accomplishments of and difficulties in her teaching career as well as her views on the role of women in
American Germanics. Although these topics were addressed, she had also prepared an outline of her life and career. Adolf discussed her total involvement in and commitment to Germanics through research and teaching. Based on the bibliographic material. I had read before the interview and correspondence between 157
Adolf and myself, my initial impressions of her were that she honestly believed that women had something "special" to give to the profession. I wanted to know whether she felt this "specialness" propelled women into particular academic areas or explained women’s outsider status more fully. I felt her insights into the profession as a female Germanist might promote my theory that women were underrepresented and unfairly discriminated against in Germanics. The interview supports my assumptions, yet what is striking is that Adolf— although discriminated against herself—held the same bias against women in the profession and "female" research areas (pedagogy) as her male colleagues. Unfortunately I found it difficult to guide Adolf towards answering direct questions or elaborating in areas I felt needed clarification, in particular what the female "specialness" might be regarding women in Germanics, or why she felt she was so different from other women in the profession. The interview was conducted entirely in English and, although edited for better readability, is reproduced here in its entirety.
Adolf: I was bom 1895—which means I am now 92 years old—in Vienna Austria.
I came to United States in 1939, came to Penn State in 1943, and became a United
States citizen in ’44. That was first as an instructor in Altoona where I taught three languages: German, French, and Spanish. In 1946 I was called to the Penn State campus where I stayed until 1963. By this time, 1963,1 had reached the age where
I had to retire. I continued, however for three years at Muhlenberg College near
Allentown. In 1970 I went to Philadelphia where my relatives lived and I taught 158
summer school at the University of Pennsylvania for one year. That experience I
value very much. When my relatives passed away and I decided to come here
[State College]. Now what did I do? I taught for roughly twenty years at Penn
State, including the three years at Altoona where I was an instructor.
Nagy: Why did you decide to study German? To receive the PhD?
Adolf: Oh for heaven’s sake. I don’t know where to start. You see I’m a very
peculiar person. I had many gifts. I don’t drive a car you know, many things I
can’t do, but others came easy to me, for instance grammar in any language.
When I started out, my most pronounced talent was really my drawing and
painting. When I was in high school I did portraits and sketches of all my
colleagues and captured the likenesses quite well. My parents loved the arts very
much and collected oil paintings, they thought I should become a portrait painter. I
took lessons more or less for seven years; my self-portrait is a culmination of these
studies. But that wasn’t my only talent. When I was eighteen, I wrote a historical
tragedy in five acts, in blank verse. Where is it? Well it’s lost. It’s a story: I lost
so many manuscripts [during World War II] I don’t know how other people were
able to escape [avoid] this. It was of course old fashioned, not naturalistic. I also
wrote poetry. No wonder, since my father, although a lawyer by profession, wrote
and published several books of poems. When he wrote the poems, he immediately
read them to us. I still know them by heart. As soon as I could write, I wrote
poetry. Some were very simple: It is spring, I love spring, the flowers bloom, the
birds sing, and so on, but embedded in these ordinary statements was something 159 personal. When I was in Allentown, I published my poems. They were in German and published in Austria. I can show them to you while you are here. The title is
Werden und Sein.44 So I didn’t know if I should be a painter or a poet.
I was really a very strange child meaning I had little contact with other children. I was very conceited really because I had an excellent, brilliant mind and
I knew that I was better in many respects than all the others although I was very poor at games and so on. One [important] thing is that I met my cousin, Leonie
Spitzer. I published her poems.45 She was a wonderful person, not only very handsome, but witty, clever, and gifted; but more than all of that she had a gift for loving and understanding people. She was five years my senior, but she became my best friend. She was more to me than my mother or my sister or anybody else.
She influenced me in my reading. I read Strindberg’s Gerede. When I was twenty-two, I had a very powerful and strange experience. It is embedded in my poems—you can see the kind of thing that comes to mind. That experience changed everything in my life because I realized that I could only do the very best, that I
couldn’t fool around because I was responsible to a higher authority for everything
I was doing. My painting didn’t pass the test anymore. I had been at various
schools, they had taught me a lot about technique and increased my perception of
colors and so on, but they also showed me that my talent was not great in spite of
my ability [gift] of painting portraits. I then found that my strongest inclination
was for languages. I finished Gymnasium—was always a brilliant scholar with 160 straight A’s all through my life, so I went to the University but what should I do?
Of course with all my inclinations it had to be languages.
It was not a matter of course I would study German. I really wanted to study Dante. I read him ever since I was a child and I found that he and I had similar feelings—the way we look at the world and so on. I soon found that I couldn’t compete with the Italians, with the knowledge of the Italian language necessary for Dante. I never really learned Italian, but I read Dante nevertheless.
I had a translation. So if not Dante, what should it be. Well, I said I could do the best in German because it’s my mother tongue. However, that didn’t mean that I knew what I would do in German. It could be grammar, it could be literature, and moreover I became interested in that which seemed most difficult—linguistics. I had a very good professor, Max Hermann Jellinek. I soon had a very good understanding of the historical grammar. By this time [1930s] I must tell you that, although I was Jewish, I never experienced any hostility from the other people, from the Aryans. And I thought that was only a matter of course because they respected my abilities. Now what should I do with this knowledge of German. My cousin had become a teacher by that time. I didn’t want to do this. I was not as crazy about young children as she was. Deep inside I wanted to continue to do my research.
I was saved any decision in this matter because Mr. Hitler came; he was of course the reason why I left Austria. I don’t think I need to tell you why. At that time I didn’t want to leave Vienna because my cousin was here, my best friend. 161
But when the situation became so impossible—a Jew was not allowed to go into a park in Vienna—I decided, of course, that I could leave. It took a long time until I got all the necessary permits. Finally, in 1939,1 managed to do it. Now, strangely enough, although the political situation continued, my personal problems found a very good solution. I had some help from the Quakers; they sent me to
Foxcroft in Virginia where I taught Latin. I liked it. I put Latin grammar into verse and I found that I was quite successful there. On the other hand, I’m very glad that I didn’t stay longer because there was really no personal fulfillment for me. My next job was in Colorado at a girl’s school where I taught French. Well the children were terrible. They were all from broken marriages you know and they only cared for horses, not for books. But I liked the climate. It was delightful. I loved Colorado, but I didn’t stay there. Through a Quaker friend I got a job at Altoona. Pennsylvania was the solution for me. It was most like
Austria in many respects. In Virginia I had students from the highest ranks of society, Vanderbilts and DuPonts and so on, who had wonderful manners and were very gifted. They treated me with reverence, but I would never be their equal. In
Pennsylvania it was different. There was no distinct difference of class.
When I left Vienna I didn’t know any Spanish but my advisors here told me
I would have a better chance of getting a job—it was already the war—if I could also teach Spanish. So I took a course in Philadelphia with some nuns who taught
Spanish and that was no problem. I taught Spanish and French and German [in
Altoona]. 162
At Penn State I met Professor Shelley, Philip Allison Shelley, who died a few years ago.46 He was a wonderful person, a handsome man, gifted himself, had a degree from Harvard, and he wanted to build around himself here at Penn
State a little Harvard. I was to be one of the few non-Harvardians because at the time already I had given several talks at the MLA conventions and he liked them.
He has always been a great supporter of me. He helped me when I organized new courses, my Wagner course for example, which was very successful. I pleased him because I frequently gave two lectures at the conventions and there was a rule that nobody was allowed to give more than one, just one. I had something that I wanted which I couldn’t have done in Vienna at all. Namely I taught but I did research at the same time. And so all my capacities were really satisfied.
Nagy: Did you ever encounter prejudice or difficulties in finding a teaching position?
Adolf: Oh yes. There were some anti-Semites even in State College.47
Nagy: What about prejudice in doing research?
Adolf: Oh no, no.
Nagy: Did you teach mostly undergraduate courses or ones at the graduate level?
Adolf: No, no you see that was very good. In Austria to teach at the university I would have to get the Dozentur. Frankly I wanted to do this. My first book, which I published in Vienna, on the grammatical problem in the Nibelei was meant to do that—but it was already too late.48 They were so anti-semitic at that time, 163 though the professors all liked me (because who doesn’t like a good student), they wouldn’t offer me a position in German.
I would have liked to give a course on Goethe. I couldn’t because I had a colleague here, a nasty fellow, he’s still alive and he’s still very nasty.49 He gave the course on Goethe. For me to teach the course would have offended him very much.
I gave a course once on Schiller in 1959, you can imagine why. Because it was the anniversary of his birth. This course was very successful. Of course we read The Robbers and other plays. Yet, because it was more within their reach, I acquainted them with the ballads of Schiller, with his poetry. For instance, do you know the Siegesfest, well we performed it one night. I had at that time two
German students in my class who helped me a lot. Spoke excellent German, of course. I liked this Schiller course because Schiller would have been a founding
father of America had he been bom here. But I couldn’t repeat this course every year, I chose Wagner.50
Richard Wagner 1813 to 1883 covers roughly the whole 19th century. The
students who took this course got an overview of 19th century German history.
They had an idea of the life of a brilliant man who some hated very much but who
was admired by others. I never hated Wagner. He was a brilliant genius. I
admired this enormously. But most importantly, he was the one person who
presented all the legendary material of Germany. He covered the Nibelungs, he
covered Tristan, he covered Parzival. I had worked with all these fields, but I 164 couldn’t compete with Wagner. Professor Henninger in the music department, a very nice, modest person, helped me with the music part, he played the records and so. The students were then asked to write their essays on his works and to prepare them, not in an ordinary way, but to stress the unity, the poetic force of every word. The students did this beautifully. Not only were there German students, some from Home Economics. They wrote they had never had such a course before. It was an introduction to poetry, psychology, philosophy, everything.
At the end of my career there was a course here in linguistics. It was an interdepartmental course—philosophy, French, German, linguistics, psychology.
These professors of course all participate with each other. The students amazingly took it all in. We found out the more you ask, the more you get. This course outline was never printed. I still have the notes but I’m afraid I won’t be able to publish anything about it. The class ended with the Lord’s Prayer in all the languages I could read. Of course, in some languages it was just impossible to translate because "Our Father" didn’t mean what it means for us. It was Their
Father and so on.
Nagy: What were your goals and motivations during the time you were teaching?
Adolf: Oh, for heaven’s sake. Well, I remember when I was teaching, somebody asked me whether I get much out of my students. So I looked at him and said no I hope they got alot out of me. For me, German—language as well as literature—was something very much alive. Otherwise I wouldn’t have chosen it.
This is what I wanted to participate in. My students reacted very well. 165
I never had my own children you know, I never married, I had no such experiences with men, but I had four children, two boys and two girls. They were students of course. The one I like best, Peggy Smith, I taught Spanish. She wrote poetry and that was the basis of our friendship. Donald Reist, a Mennonite, is a wonderful person. If he were my son, I never could have brought him up the way he is. He calls me up every day and tells me what he’s doing. He’s married, has three boys and he is working in a publishing house in Scotsdale. Donald was not a brilliant student; he lived through the heart not through the mind. The second son,
Archie Rugh, is in Germany. That had to do of course with his study of German.
He was not a brilliant student either but he loved German and he decided he must go to Germany. He worked one summer in the woods doing something with shrubs or whatever and with the money he went to Germany and hasn’t left. He sometimes visits his mother here, but he has now a job in Munich although he doesn’t like the job. But he loves Munich and the German culture so very much.
The fourth student is Sheema Buehne. Sheema I met at Foxcroft in Virginia.
Sheema is a peculiar student of mine, actually. I think she surpasses me in many respects. She’s highly musical, a wonderful piano player; she also sang very well.
She is wonderful in mathematics, she’s wonderful in languages, she cooks brilliantly, she doesn’t drive a car. But otherwise she can do everything. She’s about 10 years my junior. She had been a student at Bryn Mawr and had been sent with a stipendium to Germany where unfortunately she met a young German, married him, had two children and didn’t do what she was supposed to do, namely 166 study music. So when the war broke out, she pretended to be of German descent.
One day, however, she took her two children, said goodbye to her husband, who had joined the Germany army, and came here. Her first job was at Foxcroft where
I taught. I was her superior because I had my degree, my PhD, which I got in
Vienna, and she did not. She was a brilliant student. So when I came to Penn
State, I invited her to come and study. She got her Master’s degree and her
Doctor’s degree under me, both brilliantly done. She was such an unusual student, while still a student she edited my memorial Festschrift. Her doctoral work, a translation of Hartmann’s Gregorius, was printed by Ungar in New York.51 She was a brilliant translator and translated a book on Kafka by Wilhelm Emrich, which appeared in print.52 She has quite made a name of herself. After a while though, she had enough and she retired. Although she bought a house in Ehrensberg,
Pennsylvania where she has her wonderful piano and her wonderful selection of books. She is now in Florida because she cannot stand the winter in Pennsylvania.
Nagy: In advising female students what did you feel was essential for them to become successful teachers and scholars?
Adolf: You see I was so different from them. I didn’t broach the subject at all. I would tell them you must love your work and you must love the literature. If you do that and you can transmit it, you will be successful.
Nagy: What were the attitudes of students toward a female professor?
Adolf: This I don’t know. They never said there was a problem, on the contrary.
I would say that as far as women are concerned I had of course some brilliant 167 students with character and I must tell you that they stayed in the profession. They became professors at good universities, they did some writing. The women surpassed men in elan, what should I say, they were more human, you know. But strangely enough they didn’t stay.
Nagy: Why?
Adolf: I don’t know. I don’t know. I found out that there is something like a grandmother complex.
Nagy: What is that?
Adolf: A woman may study, she may marry, she may have children, and still continue her work. But when she has her first grandchild, she’s fed up. No, women managed—they managed quite well. But they didn’t stay in the profession later on. Even Sheema, the most brilliant of my students, didn’t stay. The moment she got a higher salary, she gave up.
Nagy: What were women able to give in their teaching?
Adolf: Well it’s hard to tell. Of course, the greatest people in the field were still the men. But as a woman, the women are more, more giving.
Nagy: Why were the men at the top of the field?
Adolf: I think they were better. They had the vaster mind, you know.
Nagy: Could you compare and contrast your promotion and salary with that of your male colleagues?
Adolf: Everything has changed so much. I am quite sure that they got more than I did. And I didn’t care. I didn’t care. You see I am not a feminist. I don’t think 168 that’s the point. The point is we should be able to give much of ourselves. That was the femininity.
Nagy: What role was assigned to women in the profession? What was your perception of the duties of women professors and male professors?
Adolf: You see I came from Austria and was very happy that I could continue my work here without the special examination. Doctors had to repeat their exams. But there were no such demands on me. I was very happy that I got a job at all and I realized that my male colleagues who were bom in America got a higher salary than I did. They were here. I was happy to be admitted. I wouldn’t say that because I came and had of course the qualifications I could accept the same salary or even a higher one, and on this basis I got on good terms with them. For instance, whoever gave a lecture at a convention could get money from a fund.
Very often I was the only one who ever really gave papers. If I had claimed this money for myself, all the other colleagues would be furious. So I didn’t take it.
They got the same amount as I did even though they did not present a paper. But you see if you come to a country you should not ask the same. You must be grateful for what you have.
The department was not democratic at all. In fact our professor [Shelley] was a rather authoritarian person. But he had values, he was my best friend. At
the end his enemies in the department prevailed. The man [Buffington] who gave
the Goethe course, an awful person. He’s now retired. Nobody liked him.53
Nagy: How many other women were in the German department with you? 169
Adolf. Well at my time there was another woman Nora [E. Wittman], a true
American. She was tall, drove her car very well, looked like a horse. Her degree was in mathematics in high school. Shelley hated her because he wanted only people who were first-rate in German and she wasn’t.54 He would have liked to get rid of her, but he couldn’t because she had tenure. So all her life, she passed away one or two years ago, was spent fighting against Shelley and Shelley against her. She had a voice and so she and the nasty one and a third professor very often held the majority. Shelley finally lost. He had to give up being head of the department. Thanks mostly to my support he continued with comparative literature as his specialty. He donated to the museum his wonderful collection of German orthograms and other things he had collected from his travels in Germany. He did a lot for the department.
Nagy: Were women in the forefront of language pedagogy?
Adolf: Frankly, I always hated education methodology. I didn’t see the point. If you understood a poet and could present his work, that arouses something in the students.
Nagy: During the time you were teaching what were some of the major contributions being made to the German profession? Who was making these contributions?
Adolf: Well Sheema was one of the best. There was another one, Peggy Peischl.
She was a strange student. She had some personality problems, but she’s now a 170
professor and writes on Storm, Keller, Meyer, and so on.55 She is quite satisfied.
How she solved her other problems with men, I don’t know. But she did.
Nagy: Who were the women in the forefront of German scholarship?
Adolf: Well I have the names of several people of course whom I met at
conventions and otherwise. One, I forget her first name, her last name was
[Margarete] Gump. She taught at Moravian in Bethlehem. She published a book
on Adalbert Stifter.56 She also painted very nice pictures, watercolors. She was a
nice person, had a good job, but was retiring. Then I met Franzi or Frances
Ascher. She was the daughter of a famous musical composer who wrote operettas.
She was also a good musician and devoted herself to the work of her father. She
taught at Millersville, Pennsylvania. She established an award; she gave money
every year to somebody in the music department who composed something musical
about motifs in her father’s works. She wrote just recently an article on Walter
Ziegel which perhaps you may have seen somewhere. My other famous colleagues
were not in German. You see, in 1960 I published my book on the Grail. I told
you earlier I wanted to study Dante, but discovered that my Italian wasn’t good
enough. So I said, well, I could still do Parzival, Wolfram, Wolfram von
Eschenbach—that [medieval literature] became my favorite thing. I wrote twelve or
so articles on these topics. Professor Metzen, who was at that time in charge of
research, suggested I write a book about it. I received a grant and wrote the book.
It’s called Visio Pacis. Holv Citv and Grail.57 Visio Pacis is a translation of 171
Jerusalem. This winter I went to Jerusalem and found that my assumptions were quite correct. It was very interesting.
They have in the German department now a young lady, [Vickie L.]
Ziegler. I think she is well liked, she writes on Middle High German lyrics. I don’t know whether she is very important or not.
Nagy: Did you know of or have you heard of Lilian Stroebe, Marian Whitney, or
Elizabeth Bohning?
Adolf: No.
Nagy: How about Melitta Gerhard?
Adolf: Oh yes. I read her books. They were quite good.
Nagy: How do you see the future of the German profession?
Adolf: I don’t know. One the one hand, you’d think that it would not be good; on the other, if you ask the department, they’re very satisfied.
Nagy: Do you have any regrets about things left undone?
Adolf: That’s a difficult question. I have still some work which I could finish, but
I’m not in very good health now so I can’t afford to do very much more work. I got more out of my studies than I ever expected. You see, I chose Wolfram because I thought I could understand the Parzival problem, with the Grail. Then as
I taught different courses, 19th century and so on, I always found something new.
But then there was something else. I had written my own dissertation on the historical dramas of Strindberg. Strindberg was one of my great loves. He was a peculiar person but the point was, I lived a very retired life. I was a woman, I didn’t marry, I was a maiden, you know. Yet I wanted to understand the whole
world. My complement was Strindberg, a man, an impossible man, but a genius.
Throughout my life I got in touch with men who were just the opposite of myself.
For instance I went to Allentown-Muhlenberg College-because they had a professor,
Heinrich Meyer, a very brilliant man who wrote a controversial book on Goethe.58
He had gotten in trouble with one of his students so they dismissed him. He got a job at Vanderbilt and I replaced him. I met him only once in my life at a
convention. He came and hugged me; that was the first and last time. For several
years, however, we have exchanged letters. He had been a Nazi; I said, of course,
he was a German, he was an Aryan, of course he was a Nazi, he couldn’t help it.
We understood each other very well. He married three times, the second one was a professor of art. I have her address and sent her his letters to me, which I had kept,
and she said she’d publish them.
Then suddenly I was asked to write about Heinrich Hauser. I said who is
Heinrich Hauser? Well he was an author, a Nazi, who wrote travelogues. They
hadn’t found a German willing to write about him. In my career I found that you
should never say no. You get an offer, accept it. I wrote about Hauser and it was
a wonderful experience for me. You see I had written so much about Wolfram, but
what did we know about Wolfram. There are so few things you could find in
history so you make guesses but that’s all. It was different with Heinrich Hauser.
With the help of a very dear and clever friend in Germany, in Frankfurt, an
alcoholic, I managed to locate his family here. They helped me and even sent me 173 some of his works that had not been published. From a literary point of view it was a most satisfactory affair. My article is not very long but I think it brings out quite a few new things.
Women’s careers in Germanics have not and do not parallel men’s. Women do not gain similar academic ranking, have an equal share in scholarly publications, or the prestige their male colleagues do. In many respects Adolf’s career reflects these inequalities. Although Adolf held the same qualifications and worked as hard as her male colleagues, she knew they received better salaries and more benefits than she did. Adolf’s personal motivation, like that of many female academics however, resulted in a professionally visible and successful career.
Adolf claims she was not concerned with having equal status with men, but she was very much aware that they were on a different level. This inequality cannot be entirely attributed, as she maintains, to her immigrant status. She got along well in the male-dominated department because it was easier to maintain a low profile, teach her required courses and do her research rather than make waves—she did not complain about a lower salary, lack of research and conference funding, or her limitations in teaching established courses.
Adolf’s clipped response to several of my questions indicates the lack of networking between female Germanists, their general low visibility in the profession, and the lack of acceptance of women’s research and other professional contributions. To become successful, i.e. visible, women not only needed to be 174 good teachers, but they needed to publish widely as well. Adolf learned early on to accept any and every project that came her way—indicated by her decision to write on Heinrich Hauser although no one else in the profession would even consider the project. Adolf does not acknowledge foreign language pedagogy as a legitimate research area. Certainly many others choose to disregard this field, but her disparagement could also indicate her unwillingness to associate herself with anything regarded by the profession as "female." This is further indicated in her isolation from other female Germanists. In a small profession where the number of women are limited, it is surprising that Adolf did not recognize several prominent women’s names, nor could she clearly remember working with any women. What is evident in the interview is that Adolf has had a successful career, but she did not and would not undermine that success by admitting that her circumstances were similar to any other woman’s in the profession. Her professional isolation from other women was not uncommon. Unfortunately, the ability to overcome this isolation did not develop until the 1970s. 175
1. Kurt Fickert, professor emeritus, Wittenberg University, letter to author, 8 November, 1988, Fickert notes; "Unfortunately... she (Melitta Gerhard) did not leave any material behind."
2. Oliver Fulton & Martin Trow, "Research Activity in American Higher Education," Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education, ed. Martin Trow (New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975): 39-83; Ralph E. Dunham, Patricia D. Wright & Marjorie O. Chandler, Teaching Faculty in Universities and Four-Year Colleges (Washington: GPO, 1966).
3. Oliver Fulton & Martin Trow, "Research Activity in American Higher Education," Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education, ed. Martin Trow (New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975): 39-83.
4. Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1933," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 33.
5. Laurence R. Veysey, The Emergence of the American University (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1965): 176.
6. Ralph E. Dunham, et. al., p. 5.
7. I use the years 1944/45 because previous to that date no degree was indicated in faculty listings published in Monatshefte.
8. Women on College and University Faculties (New York: Amo, 1977): 36.
9. National Research Council, Doctorate Production in U.S. Universities. 1929-1962. National Research Council Publication 1142 (Washington: National Academy of Sciences, 1963): 50-53.
10. These percentages are based on material extracted from David P. Benseler, "A Comprehensive Bibliography of American Doctoral Dissertations on Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, 1861-1972."
11. See for example, Jessie Bernard, "The Status of Women in Modem Patterns of Culture," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 375 (1968): 9; Making Affirmative Action Work in Higher Education: An Analysis of Institutional and Federal Policies with Recommendations. Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975): 20-21; Opportunities for Women in Higher Education. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (New York: McGraw Hill, 1973): 110; Rosalind Rosenberg, "The Limits of Access: The History of Coeducation in America," Women in 176
Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 127.
12. The number of PhDs awarded to women is based only on those degrees listed in Germanic Languages and Literatures in David P. Benseler, "Doctoral Degrees Granted in Foreign Languages in the United States: 1988," MLJ 73 (1989): 315-31.
13. "Graduate Programs: Looking Toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 311-31.
14. Nollendorfs & Amess, p. 329.
15. Many women are employed in temporary or non-tenure track positions again because of lesser mobility and greater willingness to tolerate temporary jobs. Statistics collected in 1981/82 to 1984/85 indicate that, although well over half of doctorates were awarded to women, the percentage of females hired into temporary positions was substantially higher than those hired into permanent positions. See for example, Nollendorfs and Amess, p. 329.
16. "Academic Women Revisited: An Empirical Study of Changing Patterns in Women’s Employment as College and University Faculty, 1890-1963," Journal of Social History 14 (1981): 680.
17. Carter, p. 680.
18. The classification of schools was based on information gathered from The Right College (New York: Prentice Hall, 1988).
19. Private Women’s Colleges: Bryn Mawr, Mt. Holyoke, Smith, Vassar; Private Men’s Colleges: Columbia, Harvard, Yale; Public Universities: U. Arizona, State U. of New York at Buffalo, U. Cincinnati, U. Colorado, Indiana U., Iowa State U., U. Kansas, Louisiana State U, U. Maryland, U. Michigan, U. Minnesota, U. Missouri, U. Nebraska, New York City College, U. North Carolina, Ohio State U., Ohio U., U. Pittsburgh, U. Texas, U. Virginia, U. Wisconsin; Private Universities: U. Chicago, Duke U., George Washington U., Johns Hopkins U, U. Pennsylvania, U. Rochester, Stanford U.; Land Grant Colleges: U. Berkeley, UCLA, U. Illinois, U. Kentucky, Penn State U., Rutgers U..
20. See for example, Rosenberg, pp. 107-29; Carter, pp. 675-91.
21. Rosenberg, pp. 124-25; Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1933," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 15; Marion O. Hawthorne, "Women as College Teachers," Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 146; Willystine Goodsell, "The Educational Opportunities of American 177 Women - Theoretical and Actual," Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 12.
22. The Academic Marketplace (New York: Science Editions, 1961): 111. See also Geraldine Jon?ich Clifford, "Introduction," Lone Voyagers:Academic Women in Coeducational Universities. 1870-1937 (New York: Feminist Press, 1989): 7-8.
23. Carolyn Heilbrun, "The Profession and Society, 1958-83," PMLA (1984): 408.
24. See Clifford, pp. 7-8; Rosenberg, pp. 124-25.
25. Stroebe writes (p. 6) in The Teaching of German at Vassar College in Peace and War. A Retrospect. 1905-1943 (Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College, 1944), "she [Whitney] has left the imprint of her personality on the development of modem language teaching in this country. As a member of many committees of our professional associations, as chair of the examiners in German of the College Entrance Examination Board, as one of the directors of the Modem Language Survey (1924-32), as president or director of various modem language organizations, Professor Whitney was known all over the country for her excellent new ideas on language teaching and departmental administration, for her tireless activity, and for her absolutely practical turn of mind."
26. H.C.G. von Jagemann, "On the Use of English in Teaching Foreign Languages," PMLA 1 (1886): 216-26; C.F. Kroeh, "Methods of Teaching Modem Languages," PMLA 3 (1888): 169-85; E.S. Joynes, "Reading in Modem Language Study," PMLA 5 (1890): 33-46; E.H. Babbitt, "How to Use Modem Languages as a Means of Mental Discipline," PMLA 6 (1891): 52-63; A. Altschul, "Die Natiirliche Methode in der Grammatik," Monatshefte 5 (1903-04): 255-62; Edwin C. Roedder, "Zur gesetzgebenden Grammatik," Monatshefte 5 (1903-04): 78-86; John R. Lautner, "The Question and Answer Method in Modem Language Teaching," Monatshefte 7 (1906): 197-203; Carl A. Krause, "Discussion on Present Conditions and the Direct Method," Monatshefte 11 (1910): 308-10; Krause, "The Teaching of Grammar by the Direct Method," Monatshefte 13 (1912): 178-84; Hermann Almstedt, "The Merits of the Direct Method," Monatshefte 16 (1915): 81- 88; Lawrence Price, "Natural Methods of Teaching German Composition," Monatshefte 16 (1915): 272-80; Max Griebisch, "Warum die direkte Methode?" Monatshefte 17 (1916): 293-301; Anton Appelmann, "The Essentials of the Direct Method," Monatshefte 18 (1917): 203-10; Charles Purin, "Zur psychologischen Begriindung des direktmethodischen Unterrichts in fremden Sprachen," Monatshefte Jahrbuch (1920): 20-24. 178
27. The concept of the direct method during Whitney’s career in which the exclusive use of the target language was used as a basis for reading is contradictory to more recent adaptations of this method. See for example, Stephen D. Krashen & Tracey D. Terrell, The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom (Hayward, CA: Alemany Press, 1983).
28. See also Fife, "On the Teaching of German," Modem Language Journal 5 (1920): 18-27; Handschin, "The Teaching of the Modem Languages in the United States," U.S. Bureau of Education. Bulletin No. 3 (Washington: GPO, 1913): 1- 191.
29. The Whitney/Stroebe textbooks dealt systematically with advanced German syntax by using a series of exercises containing prepared model texts illustrating a specific grammatical point.
30. Zeydel gives an example (p. 337) in "The Teaching of German in the United States from Colonial Times to the Present," Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages (New York: MLA, 1961): 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History, ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs (Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988): 15-54; "Es is nicht angemessen, die Gotter in Wande ein zu schliessen."
31. For example, B.J. Vos, Essentials of German (New York: Holt, 1903).
32. Emerson, "The Chairman’s Address," PMLA 24 (1909): lxxxviii.
33. (New York: Holt, 1912).
34. Stroebe and Whitney, p. iii.
35. Stroebe and Whitney, pp. 16-17.
36. According to Clifford (p. 173) in "Women’s Liberation and Women’s Professions: Reconsidering the Past, Present, and Future," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 165-82, Vassar resisted offering any pedagogical courses until 1925.
37. See for example, William Haussler, "The Training of a Modem Language Teacher with Special Reference to German," Monatshefte 13 (1912): 141-45; John C. Weigel, "The Reorganization of Teachers’ Training in German in our Colleges and Universities," Monatshefte 17 (1916): 16-20; 34-44; Laura B. Johnson, "Teacher Training Through Participation," M U 7 (1922-23): 28-37; C.M. Purin, "The Training of Modem Foreign Language Teachers in the Light of Investigations Conducted by the Modem Foreign Language Study," M U 13 (1928- 179
29): 15-20; Marie A. Solano, "The Preparation and Qualifications of a Modem Language Teacher," MLJ 17 (1932-33): 161-72; Clifford Parker, "The Training of Language Teachers in the Secondary Schools of New Hampshire," MLJ 19 (1934- 35): 401-24; Ruth McMurray, Max Muller, & Alexander Thomas, "Modem Foreign Languages in France and Germany. The Training of Teachers and Methods of Instruction," G Q 4 (1931): 136-39.
38. Stroebe, The Teaching of German at Vassar College in Peace and War. A Retrospect. 1905-1943 (Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College, 1944): 10.
39. Roxana Holden, "Ten Years of Undergraduate Study Abroad (The "Junior Year Abroad"), M U 19 (1934-45): 117.
40. Stroebe, "Summer Schools for Modem Languages," Education 39 (1918-19): 306.
41. Stroebe, p. 31.
42. "Korrespondenzen," Monatshefte 21 (1929): 17-18.
43. The interview was conducted entirely in English.
44. Werden und Sein: Gedichte aus fiinf Jahrzehnten. (Horn, Austria: Berger, 1964).
45. Leonie Spitzer, Wandluneen der Liebe (Darmstadt: Blaschke, 1978).
46. Shelley received his PhD from Harvard in 1938 and came to Penn State in 1939. He became chair of the Penn State German department in 1942.
47. Anti-Semitic discrimination was a topic not further addressed by Adolf or myself in the interview.
48. Wortgeschichtliche Studien zum Leib/Seele Problem. Zeitschrift fur Religionspsvchologie 5 (1937): Spec, issue, 1-114.
49. According to the Pennsylvania State University Bulletin, Albert F. Buffington (PhD Harvard 1937) taught the Goethe classes. His area of specialization, however, was the Pennsylvania German dialect and folklore.
50. Adolf’s Wagner course was titled: "The Legendary and Literary Backgrounds of Wagner’s Operas." The course description lists the contents as "the Celtic and Germanic myths; the German, Scandinavian, and French epics; and later literary treatments of the materials employed by Wagner in "The Ring of the Nibelungs," "Tristan and Isolde," and "Parsifal." 180
51. Gregorius, the Good Sinner. (New York: Ungar, 1966).
52. Franz Kafka: a Critical Study of His Writings. (New York: Ungar, 1968).
53. Interestingly, Buffington chaired the Penn State German department from 1964-65; afterwards he continued his career at Arizona State University. He also contributed an article to Adolf’s Festschrift: "The Influence of the Pennsylvania German Dialect on the English Spoken in the Pennsylvania German Area." Perhaps her animosity towards him is due to the fact that he replaced her mentor, Shelley.
54. Wittman came to Penn State in 1932, directly after earning her A.M. at Cornell. She remained at Penn State until 1960, but only as an assistant professor. She continued teaching at Kent State (1960); LeHeigh (1962 and 1964), and Cedarcrest College (1965-66). Adolf’s distain of Wittman was obvious. Wittman’s lack of "first-rate" credentials in German may have contributed to this dislike. Whether Shelley agreed with Adolf is unknown.
55. Robert Godwin-Jones & Margaret T. Peischl, Three Swiss Realists: Gotthelf. Keller, and Mever (Lanham, MD: UP of America, 1988).
56. Stifterskunstanschauung (Berlin: Eberling, 1927).
57. (State College: Pennsylvania State UP, 1960).
58. Goethe. Das Leben im Werk (Stuttgart: Gunther, 1967). CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSION
This study has examined selected roles and contributions of women in
Germanics in the United States. We defined "role" as a woman’s position and status as teacher and scholar in higher education, more specifically as faculty members in four-year colleges and universities. "Contribution" denoted the professional endeavors and service of women while serving on the faculty of any four-year higher educational institution in this country, i.e. the introduction or improvement of pedagogical methods and curricular innovations, articles and books written and published, and responsibilities within professional service organizations and on college campuses. Throughout this study the term "Germanist" has been used to mean the individual who devotes most of his/her working career to the study and teaching of German language, literature, and/or culture, while the term
"Germanics" refers collectively to that study and teaching, that is, to the discipline itself.
The years between 1850 and 1950 constitute the time frame of this study.
The initial date, 1850, was chosen for two reasons. First, because it marks the emergence of modem languages as a recognized academic discipline. By this time
German departments existed at major universities (Michigan; Johns Hopkins) and
181 182 some professional language organizations—the MLA (1883); the Nationale
Deutschamerikanischer Lehrerbund (1916) and scholarly journals Modem Language
Notes. 1885; Americana Germanica. 1897; Journal of English and Germanic
Philology. 1897; PMLA. 1883 had been established. Second, although the first
American doctorate was awarded in 1861, only shortly before the turn of the century did graduate education in the United States become available to women.
Graduate training finally allowed women to acquire the same qualifications for college and university teaching as men.1 Moreover, the increasing number of tax- supported universities opened additional employment opportunities for female faculty.
1950 is an appropriate year to conclude the study, because that year takes us to the eve of the impact of the woman’s movement and the changes the profession has witnessed since that time. The proportion of women in academe dropped notably during the late 1940s due, in part, to the G.I. Bill, which covered married veterans and therefore, "...encourage[d] marriage, thereby adversely affecting, at least in the short run, the educational and career prospects of many women. "2 The drop in women’s academic employment during the late 1940s and 1950s, as well as general changes in American higher education and society beginning in the 1960s, changed the course of women’s academic history. Although data exist on women before 1950, rarely have they been assembled into comprehensive accounts, although several studies evaluate educational trends and individual contributions by women in modem languages from World War II to the present.3 It is essential that 183 a historical study of the role of women in Germanics be available to provide the framework for further analysis of the status of women in the profession. Some current data are included for comparison with those from 1860 to 1950 so as to demonstrate how the profession has changed, specifically via the introduction of
German Studies and the Coalition of Women in German (WiG).
Professional language and literature journals were chosen as a main component for this study because they are a current and public source demonstrating literary-critical, methodological, and professional trends in
Germanics. Although Germanists publish in many different professional and/or scholarly journals, this survey is limited to those journals which are either official publications of a language organization, or more mainstream language and literature journals which historically have published a large number of articles in Germanics.
The official journals of language organizations were selected because they represent the character of an organization, and, by analogy, of the professions it reflects, by publishing meeting minutes, debates, policy decisions, and by sponsoring activities.
By surveying professional journals "the dominant critical methodologies of a particular era, the accepted boundaries of scholarly research, and the contours of prevailing literary canon" can be gathered.4 Moreover, the quality and contribution of a publication are quite difficult to measure. That an article appeared in a professional journal is an indication that it met minimum publication standards set by the editor, the editorial board, and/or the sponsoring professional or scholarly organization which owns the journal.5 184
Personal accounts by emeriti who taught in the early years of this century not only offer viewpoints and reveal aspects of the profession which might not otherwise come to light, but they also supplement and clarify historical documents.
Furthermore those emeriti provide recollections of their own careers, as well as information on older Germanists with whom they studied and worked. Because fewer and fewer professionals remain who have firsthand recollections of the early years of Germanics in the United States, the interview process can no longer be postponed. Therefore, my personal contact with Helen Adolf constitutes another aspect of this study.
Women are significant members of the profession, yet they have not been adequately represented in historical articles on the teaching of German. This dissertation demonstrates that women have traditionally been subordinate members of the profession and their activities undervalued or ignored by male professionals in American Germanics. Women have been involved in all aspects of Germanics.
They have held permanent, full-time faculty positions, actively participated in the
American Association of Teachers of German and the Modem Language
Association by presenting papers and serving as officers and committee members, and have published regularly in general language and Germanic journals. Women were not successfully integrated into the profession, between 1850 and 1950, in spite of their prominence in pedagogy and their increasing numbers.
Women have long been recognized as suitable grammar and secondary school teachers because their "innate moral sense" and feminine qualities made 185 them superior teachers for young children.6 Yet they were not desirable in the higher branches of the teaching profession. College teaching in the first half of the twentieth century was a highly prestigious and male dominated occupation.7 Until the beginning of the twentieth century, when graduate instruction in the United
States became more universally accessible, most females lacked sufficient education for higher teaching positions. Even with adequate training [gained in foreign universities], women were not widely accepted on college and university faculties in the United States. Men on college faculties and in administrative positions were reluctant to hire and promote women for fear that being associated with women would raise doubts about their own professional status.8 Some men supported women faculty as long as they remained in departments other than their own and at the lower ranks. The explanation for this attitude is that men did not want to be associated with a "feminine" position, fearing that college teaching would become a feminized profession as elementary and secondary school teaching had.9
The academic environment requires women to possess superior motivation, above-average talent and training, and extraordinary persistence to gain the professional advancements and remuneration their male counterparts expect.
Although other studies indicate women’s inferior credentials as the reason few were hired for college and university posts, it was understood, at least by female academics, that prejudice was the main reason they received fewer faculty appointments or were promoted more slowly than their male counterparts. The history of women in academe has changed little over the years. Women’s overall 186 involvement in Germanics was examined in three areas characterizing academic success—publishing, teaching and professional service. What is apparent from my research is that women have been active in all aspects of the profession, yet until recently their concerns and contributions have been either ignored or undervalued.
Although academic ranking is influenced and determined by many factors such as seniority, publications, professional service, and teaching ability, an additional determinant for academic hiring and promotion is the level of training, i.e. degree earned. Between 1861 and 1939 the percentage of American PhDs awarded to women in Germanics steadily increased.10 This percentage dropped slightly during the 1940s, a drop which could have been caused by the increase in marriage and birth rates following World War II and indicating that more women were remaining at home rather than entering into or continuing a career. The rate rose again between 1964 and 1984. In fact since the academic year 1975/76, most
PhDs awarded in Germanics have been earned by females.
Although many women faculty may be represented as part-time, visiting professors, emeritae, tutors, lecturers, teaching assistants or fellows, these data are not included since the "Personalia" directories in Monatshefte do not record such information consistently. Figures contained in Table 3 (pp. 50-56), therefore, indicate information only on full-time teaching staff—professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and instructor. I estimate the average total percentage of women Germanists active as faculty members at American universities between
1938 and 1949 at seventeen percent. The percentage of female degree recipients 187 however, has always exceeded the proportion of female faculty. The number of faculty in Germanics doubled between 1938 and 1989, but during the same period the percentage of women faculty also doubled. The increase in doctoral production accounts for some of the female faculty growth, but other factors such as an increase in female applicants and an increase in the number of non-tenured positions also may be reasons for higher percentages of women on Germanics faculties.
Based on my survey of forty institutions, the majority of female Germanists between 1938-39 and 1948-49 were employed at private women’s colleges. Other institutions (private men’s colleges, public universities, private universities, and land grant schools) with the exception of men’s colleges employed a low, albeit relatively constant, percentage of women. Rank distribution during this decade fluctuated greatly by type of institution (see Tables 13-15, pp. 134-34). Female full professors were found almost exclusively at women’s colleges and generally less than one percent or no female full professors were found at any of the other institutions. Most female Germanists, regardless of institutional type, are found in the lower ranks of assistant professor and instructor (Tables 17 and 18, pp. 139;
140). A persisting characteristic for women in Germanics in the early decades of the twentieth century, which duplicates women’s academic employment in general, is their uneven distribution in different institutional types as well as their clustering on the lower rungs of the academic ladder. While the percentage of PhDs in
Germanics awarded to women over the years has increased, the percentage of female faculty remains less than half the percentage of doctoral degree recipients. 188
By all indications factors such as lack of teaching experience, publications, and professional commitment do not hinder women entering the profession.11 Instead, factors such as lesser job mobility, willingness to accept temporary and/or part-time positions and lower pay, and the traditional roles of wife and mother are generally given as grounds for the low percentage of female faculty and their lower academic ranking.
Although research is an important function of an academic career, its relative importance depends largely on the goals of the institution where one is employed. With the passage of the Morrill Act in 1862, the function of the
American college professor changed and with this change came an increase in the importance of research and publication as indications of professional success.
Publications have been and are used to measure scholarly ability and are a basis for promotion and financial reward. The emphasis on research and publications had a tremendous impact on all women pursuing an academic career. Not only were women required to publish widely, but they were also expected to perform (i.e. teach) better than their male counterparts in order to receive academic employment and advancement. Because publication records are more observable and quantifiable than teaching or even professional service accomplishments, they are easier to evaluate.
Publication productivity of women in Germanics was investigated by examining the contents of six professional journals. Three journals—Monatshefte fur deutschen Unterricht. The German Quarterly, and The Germanic Review—were chosen as a foundation for my analysis because they publish exclusively on German language, literature and culture and the teaching of them. Three additional journals—the Publications of the Modem Language Association (PMLA: 1884), the
Journal of English and Germanic Philology (JEGP: 1899) and The Modem
Language Journal (MLJ; 1916)—were also chosen because they too are concerned with pedagogical and literary aspects of modem languages and thus enable us to look at publication outlets in all spheres of the activities of American Germanists.
The percentage of articles published by women was determined and compared to men’s publication rates. I determined the number of articles published by female
Germanists in each journal between 1899 and 1949 (Tables 4 and 5 pp. 62, 65). In order to make article percentages meaningful they were compared to the average percentage of female faculty. The types of articles published by women were also analyzed to determine the area(s) in which women publish the most. No available records indicate the number of articles submitted by women to a given journal; my analysis was, therefore, necessarily limited to published articles.
Article totals in Table 4 (p. 62) show the percentage of essays by women in journals devoted entirely to Germanics—Monatshefte. The German Quarterly, and
The Germanic Review. Table 5 (p. 65) illustrates article totals and percentage distribution of articles in Germanics authored by women in modem language periodicals—the Publications of the Modem Language Association, the Journal of
English and Germanic Philology and The Modem Language Journal. Female
Germanists published little until around 1900. Between 1900 and 1949 the percentage rates in the modem language journals fluctuate widely depending on the periodical. Overall the highest percentage of articles for modem language journals was generated between 1920 and 1939. The percentage of essays authored by women and published in Monatshefte and in The German Quarterly decreases between 1920 and 1949 (MDU 10.3 percent in 1930/39; 6.1 percent in 1940/49;
GO 15.1 percent in 1920/29; 9.4 percent in 1940/49). The Germanic Review is the only Germanics periodical that shows an overall rise in female publication rates—4.8 percent in 1920/29 to 7.5 percent in 1940/49. The average percentage of articles authored by women in Germanics journals is nearly seven (6.9) percent; the average percentage of articles by women in modem language journals is nearly nine
(8.7) percent.
Women were producing between seven and nine percent of all articles published in German and they comprised approximately seventeen percent of the faculty in Germanics at the college and university level. Men, on the other hand, constituted nearly eighty-three percent of the German faculty and were publishing ninety-one to ninety-three percent of the articles.
My analysis and tabulation demonstrate clearly that, based on cumulative production, women published less per capita than did men during the period 1900 to
1950. Several reasons have been given regarding women’s lower productivity: more career interruptions due to marriage and family responsibilities; lesser ranking and institutional affiliation; lower degree attainment; preference for teaching; and possible bias on the part of editors and editorial boards in the selection of journal 191 articles. Because more women in Germanics were employed in four-year and junior colleges at the assistant professor and instructor levels in universities, where teaching loads are heavy and time for research is at a premium, it is not surprising that women’s publication percentages were found to be lower than those of their male counterparts.
Since teaching and research are regarded widely as complementary in
American higher education, and in any given situation one area might take precedence over the other,12 the type of article a person publishes can help establish the type of courses one is assigned to teach. Yet one cannot overlook personal interest and self-motivation. In comparing bibliographies of four women with their teaching assignments, it becomes apparent that both teaching activity and personal interest are primary publication motivators.
Journararticles were categorized as either literary/philological or pedagogical/methodological to determine percentages. An article was defined as literaiy if its content was limited to critical, interpretive literary analysis of books, plays, or poetry. Philological articles were those whose content centered on the history and development of the German language and/or Germanic linguistics.
Pedagogical/methodological classifies articles as focussing on either the theoretical or practical aspects of teaching German, or both. The content of articles authored by women (in Germanics) in German and general language journals (Tables 4 and 5 pp. 62, 65) reveal that between 1900/09 42.8 percent of articles authored by women PLEASE NOTE
Page(s) not included with original material and unavailable from author or university. Rimed as received.
UMI 193 language pedagogy—which has caused this field, like many other "female"
disciplines, to become devalued.
Membership and active participation in professional organizations is another
measure of professional achievement. The active concerns of the profession are probably best reflected in the articles published in association journals as well as in the type of papers presented at annual meetings and scholarly symposia. An
individual can advance the goals of the profession by functioning as an elected officer, working as a committee member, and/or becoming involved in local organizational chapters. Because the American Association of Teachers of German
(AATG) is the only professional organization that focusses exclusively on German language, literature and culture and addresses both pedagogical as well as literary issues, the AATG was examined to show the extent of women’s involvement in the organization. Data were compiled and evaluated on membership, officer nominations, and election results, conference presenters and discussion leaders, and committee assignments and activities from annual meeting reports, constitutions and revisions thereof, membership listings, editorials, and letters published in the
AATG’s official journal, The German Quarterly. The availability of published nominations for AATG officers and members of the executive council is limited.
For example, between 1927 and 1932 none was published; nominations after 1946
were not published in The German Quarterly, but mailed separately to AATG
members.14 Consequently my conclusions are based only on the nominations
published in The German Quarterly between 1934 and 1944. Because The German 194 Quarterly published its first membership list in 19S0, and the AATG office kept no records of individual memberships earlier than 1978,15 neither the number of women members between 1926 and 1949 nor the total membership can be determined. Percentages of female membership therefore, are based on the 1950 published membership list. The data on females in the AATG were used as a gauge for women’s activity in professional organizations.
The AATG (1926) was formed primarily because of the demand for a strong organization devoted to restoring German to the American high school and college curriculum due to its demise following World War I. Other factors encouraging the establishment of the organization include the success of the American Association of
Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese (1917) (the founding of the AATSP capitalized on the demise of German as the prominent language then taught in American schools) and the concurrent founding of the American Association of Teachers of
French (1926). The primary function of the AATG was to provide a professional outlet for teachers. The pedagogical focus of the organization can be seen in the content of papers presented at annual meetings, published in The German Quarterly, and in the activities of its members and committees.
Although AATG membership increased steadily between 1926 and 1950 a constant problem was its relatively small representation of college and high school teachers in terms of the total number of members compared to the number of
Germanists in the profession (i.e. potential membership). Unfortunately since membership in the AATG is not mandatory for any German teacher and is open to 195 anyone interested in German language, culture, and literature, it is impossible to
determine what percentage of members were employed as German teachers or what
percentage of German teachers were AATG members. Because the QQ did not
begin publishing annual membership lists until 1950 and the AATG office has no
records of memberships earlier than 1978, neither the number of female members or the total membership can be determined between 1926 and 1949.
Women met their subordinate role in the AATG with attempts to improve their low status. These attempts however, were limited and relatively unsuccessful.
In 1934 for example, a committee proposed a constitutional resolution to provide more equal representation for women and secondary school teachers on each election ballot. This resolution ensured women an elected office, yet they still remained isolated from the top AATG offices. Women were adequately represented in the AATG between 1938 and 1949 in terms of nominated officers and committee members; however, they were rarely elected to the highest offices and those elected were mostly secondary school teachers. Female Germanists teaching in colleges and universities were underrepresented in the AATG and thus their concerns were overlooked by the members of the organization.
The individuals who led the AATG were primarily male college and university professors. Nominations were made by a nominating committee whose members are appointed by the president; the editor of The German Quarterly
is—and has been—appointed by the president subject to the advice and consent of the Executive Council. The AATG, like the profession in general, is governed by a 196 handful of scholars. To become a member of this inner circle, one needed to be a well-published scholar, and until the 1970s and early 1980s, my study has demonstrated that one had to be male as well. The exclusion of women from the inner circle of the profession forced some female scholars to establish committees to look into the representation of women within the organization (Lilian Stroebe in
1934), or to establish a separate organization (Coalition of Women in German,
WiG) which better met femanist Germanists’ professional needs.
In general, the low academic status and exclusion of women from top AATG offices during the period of this study indicates the lack of recognition of women’s professional abilities and contributions. That male Germanists did not accept women as professional equals is evidenced by women’s persistently low academic status, their unequal historical representation among the officers of the AATG, and by the low number of their papers accepted for presentation at professional meetings and published in professional journals; the relatively recent establishment of a separate female Germanists' organization. Women in German (WiG) demonstrates clearly that femanist Germanists have perceived their needs as being unmet by the AATG. Women are a significant part of the profession, yet they have not been treated as such. If, as studies indicate, marriage and family are deterrents for women receiving academic appointments and/or promotions, or result in women having less time to devote to research and publications, then the profession needs to address these issues and legitimize alternative solutions. 197
Women’s contributions to Germanics have been overlooked in previous historical accounts of the profession. Four individual careers have been highlighted here as examples of women’s commitment and contributions to Germanics.
Personal histories of Marian Whitney, Lilian Stroebe, Melitta Gerhard, and Helen
Adolf are intended to illustrate examples of women’s activities and experiences in the profession. As the careers of these women show, no clear pattern exists for women’s entrance into or advancement and success in the profession, but while the women in Germanics come from a variety of backgrounds, the social and cultural obstacles each must overcome in becoming part of the profession is essentially the same.16 These four women left their imprint on the profession by designing and teaching innovative college courses, writing textbooks and scholarly essays, and becoming involved in professional language organizations and committees. The personal histories and accomplishments illustrate a few examples of women’s broad range of activities and experiences in Germanics.
Marian Whitney was instrumental in establishing one of the first teacher training programs. At Vassar she implemented a program that included language and literature instruction, psychology of modem language learning, aims and development of modem language teaching, and practice teaching. In addition, in her program she stressed the importance of study abroad programs and language clubs and houses since these programs enabled students to increase their general language skills. Whitney (in collaboration with Lilian Stroebe) also wrote numerous textbooks designed specifically for American students of German. The 198 most significant of these is her Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. This text, written entirely in German, contains simple vocabulary and examines literature from the beginnings to the present. Drawing on her extensive pedagogical knowledge, Whitney emphasized the most important periods and authors for
American students. The introductory chapters contained substantial background information in German history and social conditions. They portrayed, in a manner unprecedented in language and literature textbooks for American higher education, historical events and changes in German social and economic conditions—factors which influenced authors.
Lilian Stroebe’s lasting contribution to Germanics was the concept and founding of the German (Middlebury) summer language school, which continues even today. The objectives of the summer school were to give students an opportunity to constant practice the foreign language as well as work with new teaching methodologies. The basic tenants of the summer school are to gain fluency the modem language and its culture. Stroebe’s summer school offered
American students and teachers what they could get abroad—foreign atmosphere, I foreign language—but also offered superior training for American teachers of
American students.
Like many Germanists, Melitta Gerhard left few traces of her career except
for a body of published works. The size of her bibliography indicates that she had
some influence on Germanics; unfortunately the exact nature of that impact is unknown. The lack of substantial data on a widely published Germanist and chair 199 of a modern language department demonstrates the need for better archival procedures in the profession to bring personal/professional records into safe archives.
The basic inequalities—low academic ranking, salary, and disproportionate representation in professional organizations—facing female Germanists between
1940 and 1960 is reflected in Helen Adolfs career. Although Adolf held the same qualifications and obviously worked at least as hard as her male colleagues, she knew they received better salaries and more benefits than she did. Adolfs personal motivation, like that of many female academics however, resulted in a professionally visible and successful career. Adolf herself was not concerned with having equal status with men, or anyone else. Her success is based on her belief in the high quality of her teaching and scholarship, her rapport with students, and her genuine love of Germanics.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY
Researching and compiling a part of the history of Germanics in the United
States poses several problems. Not only are there fewer individuals alive today who possess firsthand knowledge of and historical experience in the profession, but also valuable primary materials are lost due to lack of interest or lack of recognition of their significance to professional history. Germanists often fail to leave, in their department or in an appropriate archive, documents relevant to their activities.
Much information about many Germanists is simply unavailable—even basic biographical data are inaccessible. Likewise, organizations often do not maintain 200 adequate records of activities, membership lists, and committee reports. Materials
(meeting minutes, memos, letters, course outlines, teaching evaluations, newsletters, annual reports) need to be preserved, archived, and cataloged using a standardized method.
Personal accounts by emeriti who taught in the early years of this century not only offer viewpoints and reveal aspects of the profession which might not otherwise come to light, but they also supplement and clarify historical documents.
Yet as valuable as individual histories are, few Germanists have been interviewed.
Interviews should be conducted not only prominent Germanists, but with ordinary members of the profession in order to accurately reflect our history. A collection of standard interview questions is needed to provide a basis from which conclusions and comparisons may be drawn.
Areas which would offer additional insights into the role of women in
Germanics might include the following: 1) inquiry into the reasons for women immigrating to the United States. Were these women trying to avoid discrimination in their homeland? 2) Is there perhaps a correlation between the roles of American- born versus foreign-born Germanists and their view and treatment of women? 3)
What has been the impact of WiG on the profession and the status of women?
Regardless how much information is accumulated, without proper analysis it is useless. Members of the profession must understand past motivations, weaknesses, and strengths. This understanding comes from recording and critically explaining the various aspects of the history of Germanics. This dissertation 201 provides a portion of that professional history, overlooked until now, by providing the first comprehensive analysis of the roles and contributions of women in the profession of Germanics in the United States. 202
1. Although women were not actually barred from college and university teaching, it was difficult for them, because of male prejudices, to gain access to the male-dominated faculties. Once women were able to prove their intellectual abilities, at least one obstacle was eliminated. See for example, Lone Vovaeers: Academic Women in Coeducational Universities. 1870-1937. ed. Geraldine Jonpich Clifford (New York: Feminist Press, 1989): 23-25; Thomas Woody, A History of Women’s Education in the United States. 2 Vols (New York: Science, 1929): 327- 28.
2. Barbara Sicherman, "College and Careers: Historical Perspectives on the Lives and Work Patterns of Women College Graduates," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 161.
3. Jeannine Blackwell, "Turf Management or Why is the Great Tradition Fading?" Monatshefte 77 (1985): 271-85; Valters Nollendorfs & Carol Amess, "Graduate Programs: Looking toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 311-31; Peter A. Eddy, "Present Status of Foreign Language Teaching: A Northeast Conference Survey," Our Profession: Present Status and Future Directions, ed. Thomas H. Geno (Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference, 1980: 13-59; German Studies and Women’s Studies: New Directions in Literary and Interdisciplinary Course Approaches, ed. Sidonie Cassirer & Sydna Stem Weiss (South Hadley, MA: Coalition of Women in German, 1983); Susan Pentlin, "Women as Foreign Language Educators, 1920-1960," unpublished manuscript.
4. Henry J. Schmidt, "Rationales and Sources for a History of German Studies in the United States," Monatshefte 75 (1983): 262.
5. Not all journals instituted a blind review process, therefore the chance for an article to be published because the author is well-known increases.
6. See for example Woody, p. 464; Joan Jacobs Brumberg & Nancy Tomes, "Women in the Professions: A Research Agenda for American Historians," Reviews in American History 10 (1982): 282.
7. Patricia M. Hummer, "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1930," Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 29.
8. Rosalind Rosenberg, "The Limits of Access: The History of Coeducation in America," Women in Higher Education in American History, ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe (New York: Norton, 1988): 125.
9. Clifford, Lone Vovaeers. p. 28. 203 10. Percentages are based on material extracted from David P. Benseler. "A Comprehensive Bibliography of American Doctoral Dissertations on Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, 1861-1972."
11. Valters Nollendorfs & Carol Amess, "Graduate Programs: Looking Toward the 1990’s," Monatshefte 76 (1984): 329
12. Michael C.T. Brookes & Katherine L. German, Meeting the Challenges: Developing Faculty Careers. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Reports 3 (Washington: ASHE, 1983): 35; Paul H Morrill & Emil R. Spees, The Academic Profession: Teaching in Higher Education (New York: Human Sciences, 1982): 28.
13. Roberta Frankfort, Collegiate Women. Domesticity and Career in Tum- of-the-Centurv America (New York: New York UP, 1977): 9; Martin J.Finkelstein, The American Academic Profession: A Synthesis of Social Scientific Inquiry Since World War II (Columbus, Ohio State UP, 1984): 71; Tessa Blackstone & Oliver Fulton, "Men and Women Academica: An Anglo-American Comparison of Subject Choices and Research Activity," Higher Education 3 (1974): 126.
14. Decennial Index, German Quarterly 10 (1937): 3.
15. Helene Zimmer-Loew, Executive Director of the AATG, letter to author, 8 December 1989.
16. Generally in American society there has been a contradiction between the traditional image of woman’s role as mother and wife and of her as career woman. Those women who take their work seriously and who have entered traditionally male-dominated fields have often been labeled unfeminine because their careers conflict with the traditional images of the woman in society. See for example, William H. Chafe, The American Woman: Her Changing Social. Economic & Political Roles. 1920-1970 (New York: Oxford UP, 1974): 99; Geraldine Hammond, "And What of Young Women?" AAUP Bulletin 33 (1947): 299. APPENDIX A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CONSULTED
The bibliographies of Whitney, Stroebe, Gerhard, and Adolf have been divided according to the following classifications:
Dissertation refers to writing submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a doctoral degree.
Articles refers to any document published in a German language or modem language journal.
Textbooks refers to any book that has been written, revised or edited for the . teaching of German in a secondary or college classroom.
Books refers to any major treatise published as a volume.
Edited Books refers to edited collections of essays.
Creative writing refers to original fiction or adaptations of fiction for other use.
205 206
Marion Whitney: A Listing of Her Publications
Dissertation
"The ’Young King’ and Largesse: A Study in Mediaeval Manners." Diss. Yale U, 1901.
Articles
"The American-Born Teacher of Modem Language." Monatshefte 18 (1917): 239-41.
"National Ideals and the Teaching of Modem Languages." Modem Language Journal 3 (1918): 5-13.
"Random Notes of a Modem Language Teacher in Europe." Modem Language Journal 5 (1920-21): 429-34.
"German Drama Since the War." Modem Language Journal 7 (1922-23): 275-83.
"Germany’s Contribution to the Modem Drama." Modem Language Journal 9: 79-84.
"Hagboldt’s essentials once more." Modem Language Journal 12 (1928): 553-54.
"Goethe." Monatshefte 24 (1932): 92-93.
"The Contemporary German Drama." Books Abroad 9 (1935): 11-14
Textbooks
Introductory French Reader. New York: Holt, 1891 (with William Dwight Whitney).
An Introductory German Reader. New York: Holt, 1895 (with William Dwight Whitney). 207
Ed. Per dritte: Vorspiel in einem Aufzue. By Roderich Bebedix. New York: Holt, 1895.
Ed. Irrfahrten. By Friedrich Gerstacker. New York: Holt, 1896, 1925.
Ed. Minna von Bamhelm oder Das Soldatengliick. New York: Holt, 1899 (with Willian Dwight Whitney).
Ed. Heimatklane. By E. Werner. New York: Holt, 1903.
Advanced German Composition. New York: Holt, 1910 (with Lilian L. Stroebe).
Exercises in German Syntax and Composition for Advanced Students. New York: Holt, 1910, 1912 (with Lilian L. Stroebe).
Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. New York: Holt, 1913 (with Lilian L. Stroebe).
Easy German Composition with an Abstract of German Grammar, and Present-dav Germany: Deutsch Realien. New York: Holt, 1926, rev. ed. 1939 (with Lilian L. Stroebe).
A Brief Course in German. New York: Holt, 1926, rev. ed. 1927 (with Lilian L. Stroebe).
Creative Writing
King Gorm the Grim. Ballad for Chorus of Mixed Voices and Orchestra. Words after Theodor Fontane. Music by Horatio W. Parker. New York: G. Schirmer, 1910. 208
Lilian Stroebe: A Listing of Her Publications
Dissertation
Die altenelischen Kleidemamen: eine kulturgeschichtlich-etvmologische Untersuchung. Diss. Heidelberg, 1904. Boma, Leipzig: Noske, 1904.
Articles
"Wie kann sich der Lehrer eine gute Kenntnis des deutschen Lebens erwerben?" Monatshefte 17 (1916): 2-6.
"Das Studien der Geographie und Landeskunde Deutschlands." Modem Language Journal 1 (1916): 59-71.
"Der deutsche Unterricht und die deutsche Kunst." Monatshefte 19 (1918): 154, 172.
"Summer Schools For Modem Languages." Education 39 (1918-19): 305-16.
"Organization and Management of Summer Schools for Modem Languages." Education 39 (1919): 304-16; 356-66.
"Section Meetings: Programs and Management." Modem Language Journal 4 (1919-20): 207-16.
"The Real Knowledge of a Foreign Country." Modem Language Journal 5 (1920-21): 38-44, 93-101.
"Education by Travel for Vassar Students." Vassar Quarterly 1922.
"College Credit and Summer School Work Abroad." Modem Language Journal 7 (1923): 403-408.
"The Use of Pictures as Illustrative Material in Modem Language Teaching." Education 43 (1923): 363-72. 209
"Die Stellung des Mittelhochdeutschen im College-Lehrplan." Monatshefte Jahrbuch (1924): 27-37.
"German Enrollment in Women’s Colleges in the East in 1923 and 1924." Monatshefte Jahrbuch (1924): 59.
"German Fiction since the War." Modem Language Journal 10: (1925-26): 491-94.
"The Teaching of German Literature in College." German Quarterly 1 (1928): 120-31.
"How to Plan a Grammar Lesson." Monatshefte 21 (1929): 10.
"How to Prepare a Reading Lesson." Monatshefte 21 (1929): 42.
"The Conversation Lesson and the German Background." German Quarterly 2 (1929): 54-61.
"Books in English for the Study of German." Modem Language Journal 14 (1930): 648-50.
"Reading Comprehension Tests." German Quarterly 3 (1930): 79-94.
"How to Prepare a Review Lesson." Monatshefte 22 (1930): 13-18.
"Deutsche Privatlekture im vierten Semester." Monatshefte 22 (1930): 141-45.
"Self-improvement and inexpensive books for the teaching of German." Modem Language Journal 16 (1932): 289-98.
"Reading Comprehension Tests." Monatshefte 25 (1933): 1-11.
"Acceleration-Intensification." German Quarterly 15 (1942): 185-92.
"Training Government Translators at Vassar." Monatshefte 35 (1943): 265-70.
"Reflections on ’The Gift of Tongues’ by Margaret Schlauch." Modem Language Journal 28 (1944): 296-301.
"Once More - Intensive Courses in Foreign Languages." Monatshefte 36 (1944): 309-16. 210
"Standardized Tests for Aural Comprehension." Modem LanguageJournal 29 (1945): 146-47.
Textbooks
Exercise in German syntax and composition for advanced students. New York: Holt, 1910 (with Marian P. Whitney).
Advanced German Compositions. New York: Holt, 1910 (with Marian P. Whitney).
Easy German Composition with an Abstract of German Grammar and Present-dav Germany: Deutsch Realien. New York: Holt, 1912. rev. ed. 1939 (with Marian P. Whitney). Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. New York: Holt, 1913 (with Marian P. Whitney).
Ed. Deutsche Anekdote fur die Schule. Boston, New York: DC Heath, 1916.
A Brief Course in German. New York: Holt, 1926. rev. ed. 1927 (with Marian P. Whitney).
Practical Exercises in German Pronunciation. New York: Holt, 1929.
Ed. Frieder. Im Turineer Wald. By Agnes Sapper. New York: FS Crofts, 1931 (with G.C. Cast).
Ed. Abenteuer in Berlin. By Nohara Komakichi. New York: Crofts, 1931,1935, 1936, 1937 (with Gabriele M.A. Humbert).
Ed. Emil und die Dektiven. By Erich Kastner. New York: Holt, 1933, 1935 (with Ruth J. Hofrichter).
Ed. Leicht und Neu. Vier Erzahluneen fiir Anfanger. New York: Crofts, 1934, 1938 (with Ruth J. Hofrichter).
Ed. Hohensonne. Lustspiel in drei Akten. By Ludwig Fulda. New York, London: D. Appleton-Century, 1937 (with Ada M. Klett).
Ed. Robbv kampft um seine Freiheit. die Geschichte einer Entfiihrung. By Peter Matteus. New York: Holt, 1937 (with Ruth J. Hofrichter).
Ed. Emil und die drei Zwillinee. By Erich Kastner. New York: Holt, 1938 (with Gabriele Humbert Parker). 211
Ed. Achtung! Achtune! Hier ist der kleine Muck! By Herbert Alexander Stutzer. New York, London: Appleton-Century, 1941.
Vom Alltag zur Literatur: Oral and Written Composition withan Outline of German Grammar. New York: Holt, 1944.
Books
The Teaching of German at Vassar College in Peace and War, a Retrosnect. 1905-1943. Bulletin of Vassar College 34 (1944). 212
Melitta Gerhard: A Listing of Her Publications
Dissertation
Schiller und die eriechische Tragodie. Diss. Forschungen zur neueren Literaturgeschichte 54. Weimar: Duncker, 1919. Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1978.
Articles
"Verlauf und Bedeutung von Schillers und Goethes Begegnung im Juli 1794." Journal of English and Germanic Philology 39 (1940): 115-23.
"Chaos und Kosmos in Goethe’s Hermann und Dorothea." Monatshefte 34 (1942): 415-24.
"Schillers ’Gotter Griechenland’ in ihrer geistesgeschichtlichen Bedeutung." Monatshefte 37 (1945): 32-43.
"Der Briefwechsel zwischen Schiller und Goethe: Ein Denkstein ihres Erziehungswerkes an der Mitwelt." Germanic Review 30 (1955): 243-51.
"Goethes ’Gepragte Form’ im romantischen Spiegel." On Romanticism and the Art of Translation: Studies in Honor of Edwin Hermann Zevdel. Ed. Gottfried F. Merkel. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1956. 29-46.
"Antike Gdtterwelt in Wielands und in Schillers Sicht: Zur Entstehung und Auffassung der ’Gotter Griechenlands’." Schiller 1759-1959: Commemorative American Studies. Ed. John R. Frey. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1959. 1-11.
"Schillers Lehre von der erzieherischen Bedeutung des ’Spiels’: Eine Aufgabe auch fur unsere Zeit." German Quarterly 32 (1959): 293-301.
"Schillers Zielbild der asthetischen Erziehung und das Wirken Stefan Georges." Monatshefte 51 (1959): 275-82. 213
"Grimmelshausens Simplicissimus als Entwicklungsroman." Per Simplisissimusdichter und sein Werk. Ed. Gunther Weydt. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftl. Buchgesellschaft, 1969. 133-60.
"Auf dem Wege zu neuer Weltsicht: Zur Entwicklung der deutschen Lyrik von Klopstock bis zum zwanzigsten Jahrhundert." German Quarterly 42 (1969): 629-64. "Die Gesetzmassigkeit alles Leben als Erkenntnis und Forderung Goethes." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1969): 194-214.
"Goethes Sturm-und-Drang-Epoche in der Sicht des alten Goethe: Zu Dichtung und Wahrheit." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1970): 190-202.
"Das Zielbild ’hoher Jugend’: Ein Leitgedanke von Winckelmann bis George." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1971): 448-55.
"Wirklichkeitsstoff und Mythos: Zum Werk Stefan Georges." Castrum Peregrini 101 (1972): 49-61.
"Die ’unterstrichene Stelle’: Zur Frage der Berechtigung einer Trennung von ’Schicksal’ und ’Charakter’ im dichterischen Werk." Deutsche Vierteliahresschrift 52 (1975): 63-70.
"Zeitkrisis und Neubeginn: Mahnrufe im deutschen SchrifttmirvoirGoethe -----bis George." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (19751: 346-61.
"Rom in seiner Bedeutung fur Goethe: Ein ’Neue Welt’." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1977): 83-91.
"Faust: Die Tragodie des ’neueren’ Menschen." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1978): 160-64.
"Asthetische Erziehung’ und Zukunftsausblick: Zu Goethes und Schillers Stellung gegemiber ihrer Epoche." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1980): 169-76.
"Ursache und Bedeutung von Goethe ’Entsagung’." Jahrbuch des Freien Deutschen Hochstifts (1981): 110-15.
Books
Schiller und die eriechische Tragodie. Diss. Forschungen zur neueren Literaturgeschichte 54. Weimar: A. Duncker, 1919. Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1978. 214 Der deutsche Entwicklunesroman bis zu Goethes ’Wilhelm Meister’. Halle, Saale: Niemeyer, 1926. 2nd ed. Bern, Munich: Francke, 1968.
Schiller. Bern, Munich: Francke, 1950.
Stefan George. Dichtung und Kiindung. Bern: Francke, 1962.
Das Werk Adele Gerhards als Ausdruck einer Wendezeit. Bern: Francke, 1963.
Leben im Gesetz. Fiinf Goethe Aufsatze. Bern: Francke, 1966.
Auf dem Wege zu neuer Weltsicht: Aufsatze zum deutschen Schrifttum vom 18. bis 20. Jahrhundert. Bern: Francke, 1976. 215
Helen Adolf: A Listing of Her Publications
Dissertation
"Die dramatische Technik in Strindbergs historischen Dramen." Diss. Vienna, 1923.
Articles
"Knut Hamsuns Veranlagung und Weltbild." Zeitschrift fur Religionspsvchologie 1 (1927): 22-38.
"Selma Lagerldf." Zeitschrift fur Religionspsvchologie 1 (1929): 348-71.
"Got.-rz." Zeitschrift fur deutsche Philoloeie 40(1930): 257-61.
"Zu Parzival, vv. 795, 30ff." Neophiloloeus 28 (1933): 16-21.
"Zu Alexius, vv. 1-12." Zeitschrift fur franzosische Sprache und Literatur 57 (1933): 88-91.
"Die Wolframsche Wendung ’diu hoehste hant.’" Neophiloloeus 19 (1934): 260-64.
"Kaupatjan, colaphizare, KoKa^eiv." Neophiloloeus 19 (1934): 100-01.
"Findlinge (1. Zu Faust Vers 4666 bis 4678; Zu Wallensteins Lager: ’Als die weimar’ schen Freiwilligen ausmarschierten’)." Chronik des Wiener Goethe-Vereins 41 (1936): 36-37.
"Analyse der religiosen Ergriffenheit." Zeitschrift fur Relieionspsvcholoeie 9 (1936): 31-38.
"Der Eingang zu Wolframs Parzival." Neophilogus 22 (1937): 110-20, 171-85.
"Unter dem Schleier der Gisela." Zeitschrift fur Religionspsvchologie 10 (1937): 152-58. 216
"A Historical Background for Chretien’s ’Perceval’." PMLA 58 (1943): 597-620.
"Intonation and Word Order in German Narrative Style." Journal of English and Germanic Philology 43 (1944): 71-79.
"Studies in the Perlesvaus, the Historical Background." Studies in Philology 42 (1945): 723-40.
"The Theological and Feudal Background of Wolfram’s Parzival." Journal of English and Germanic Philology 49 (1945): 285-303.
"The Esplumoir Merlin: a Study in its Cabalistic Sources." Speculum 21 (1946): 173-93.
"Studies in Chretien’s Conte del Graal." Modem Language Quarterly 7 (1947): 3-19.
"On Mediaeval Laughter." Speculum 22 (1947): 251-53.
"Rilke: Transcended or Transcending?" Yearbook of Comparative Criticism 9 (1947): 95-108.
"OHG wuntaron and the Verbs of Fear and Wonder." Journal of English and Germanic Philology 46 (1947): 395-406.
"New Light on Oriental Sources for Wolfram’s Parzival and Other Grail Romances." PMLA 62 (1947): 306-24.
"Robert de Baron’s Joseph and the Privilegium Fori." Philological Quarterly 26 (1947): 259-67.
"In Memoriam Elise Richter." Romance Philology 1 (1948): 338-41.
"Fr. Hallali, Ger. Halali = ’Praise (My Soul)’?" Studies in Philology 46 (1949): 514-20.
"The Ass and the Harp." Speculum 25 (1950): 49-57.
"The Essence and Origin of Tragedy." Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 10 (1951): 112-25.
"Studien zur Gralssage: Eine Zusammenfassung." Archiv fur das Studium der neueren Sprachen 103 (1951): 66-72. 217
"Kleist’s Kunigunde, Jung Stilling, and the Motif of the Paradox."Journal nf English and Germanic Philology 52 (1953): 312-21.
"A Mid-Century Duel: Gottfried Keller and Heine." Germanic Review 28 (1953): 180-89.
"Tristan aux enfers." Bulletin Bibliographique de la Societe International Arthurienne 6 (1954): 100-01.
"The Philosophy of the Rose." Eleusis of Chi Omega 57 (1955): 405-08.
"Books by Martin Buber." Inward Light 18 (1955): 38-39.
"Christendom and Islam in the Middle Ages: New Light on ’Grail Stone’ and ’HiddenHost’." Speculum 32 (1957): 103-15.
"From Everyman and Eleckerlijc to Hofmannsthal and Kafka." Comparative Literature 9 (1957): 204-14.
"Literary Characters and Their Subterranean Sources: The Amazon Type in Literature." Comparative Literature 1 (1959): 256-62.
"Words, Objects, Ideas: OHG gotawebbi." Journal of English and Germanic Philology 58 (1959): 442-56.
"Wesen und Art des Rings: Lessings Parabel nach mittelalterlichen Quellen gedeutet." German Quarterly 34 (1961): 228-34.
"Schlusswort." German Quarterly 34 (1961): 237.
"Das Stemkreuz." Du Selbst (1963): 35-36.
"Studies in the Medieval Scale of Values: The Virtues." Ed. Betz, Werner, Evelyn S. Coleman & Kenneth Northcott. Tavlor Starck: Festschrift. The Hague: Mouton, 1964. 212-22.
"The Concept of Original Sin as Reflected in Arthurian Romance." Ed. Mieczyslaw Brahmer, Stanislaw Helsztynski & Julian Kryzanowski. Studies in Language and Literature in Honour of Margaret Schlauch. Warsaw: Polish Scientific, 1966. 21-29.
"Personality in Medieval Poetry and Fiction." Deutsche Vierteliahresschrift 44 (1966): 9-19. 218
Introduction. Hartmann von Aue: Gregorius. The Good Sinner. Ed. and trans. Sheema Zeben Buehne. New York: Ungar. 1966. 5-9.
"Wrestling with the Angel: Rilke’s ’Gazing Eye’ (’Der Schauende’) and the Archetype." Ed. Joseph Strelka. Perspectives in Literary Symbolism. University Park & London: Penn State UP, 1968. 29-39.
"Walter von der Vogelweide and the Awakening of Personality." Germanic Studies in Honor of Edward Henrv Sehrt. Presented bv His Colleagues. Students, and Friends on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday. March 3. 1968. Ed. Frithjof A. Raven, Wolfram K. Legner & James C. King. Coral Gables FL: U of Miami P, 1968: 1-13.
"The Figure of Wisdom in the Middle Ages." Arts liberaux et philosophie au moven age: Actes du auatrieme coneres international de philosophie medievale. Montreal: Institut d’etudes medievales; Paris: Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, 1968: 429-43.
"Le vieuz Roi, Clef de Voute du Conte del Graal." Melanges offerts a Rita Leieune. Professeur a l’Universite de Liege. Gembloux: Duculot, 1969: 945-55.
"G.W.F. Hegel, die Kreuzziige und Chretiens Conte del Graal." Deutsche Vierteliahrsschrift 49 (1971): 32-42.
"Mysticism and the Growth of Personality: A Study in Dante’s Vita nuova." Studies in Honor of Tatiana Fotitch. Ed. Josep M. Sola-Sole, Allesandro S. Crisafulli & Siegfried A. Schulz. Washington: Catholic U of America P, 1972: 165-76. "Structure and Character Delineation in the Parzival". Ed. Schroder, Werner. Wolfram Studien V. Berlin: Schmidt, 1979: 166-82.
Books
Translation with introduction: Therese von Avila. By Jeanne Galzy. Munich, 1929.
Worteeschichtliche Studien zum Leib/Seele Problem. Zeitschrift fur Religionspsvchologie 5 (1937): Spec, issue, 1-114.
Visio pacis: Holv City and Grail: An Attempt at an Inner History of the Grail Legend. State College: Pennsylvania State UP, 1960. Edited Books
Ed. Dem neuen Reich enteesen. 1850-1871. Leipzig: Reclam, 1930. Vol. 6 of Deutsche Literatur: Reihe Politische Dichtung.
Ed. Im neuen Reich. 1871-1914. Leipzig: Reclam, 1932. Vol. 7 of Deutsche Literatur: Reihe Politische Dichtung.
Ed. Wandluneen der Liebe. By Leonie Spitzer. Darmstadt: Blaschke, 1978.
Creative Writing
"United Animals (A Farm Story)." Inward Light 22 (1959): 15-19.
Werden und Sein: Gedichte aus funf Jahrzehnten. Horn, Austria: Berger, 1964. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CONSULTED
" AAUP Preliminary Report on the Status of Women." Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 7 (1921): 21-32.
Abel, Emily. Terminal Degrees: Job Crisis in Higher Education. New York: Praeger, 1984.
Abramson, Joan. The Invisible Woman: Discrimination in the Academic Profession. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975.
Adler, G.J. Ollendorf’s New Method of Learning to Read. Write, and Speak German. New York, 1845.
Advanced German Composition. Ed. Marian P. Whitney & Lilian Stroebe. New York: Holt, 1910.
Ahn, Franz. A New Practical and Easy Method of Learning German. Philadelphia, 1859.
Aisenberg, Nadya & Mona Harrington. Women of Academe. Amherst: U of Massachusetts P, 1988.
Almstedt, Hermann. "The Merits of the Direct Method." Monatshefte 16 (1915): 81-88.
Altschul, A. "Natiirliche Methode in der Grammatik." Monatshefte 5 (1903): 255- 62.
American Women. Ed. Durward Howes. Vol. Ill, 1939; rpt. Teaneck, NJ: Zephyrus, 1974.
American Council on Education. Women in Higher Education: Papers for Participants in the 55th Annual Meeting of the American Council on Education. Washington: A.C.E., 1972.
220 221
American Higher Education. A Documentary History. Ed. Richard Hofstadter & Wilson Smith. 2 vols. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1961.
American Women: Report of the President’s Commission on the Status of Women and Other Publications of the Commission. Ed. Margaret Mead & Frances Balgley Kaplan. New York: Scribner, 1965.
Antler, Joyce. "The Educational Biography of Lucy Sprague Mitchell: A Case Study in the History of Women’s Higher Education." Women in Higher Education in American History. Ed. John Mack Farahger & Florence Howe. New York: Norton, 1988: 43-63.
Appelmann, Anton. "The Essentials of the Direct Method." Monatshefte 18 (1917): 203-10.
Astin, Helen. "Factors Affecting Women’s Scholarly Productivity." The Higher Education of Women. Ed. Helen S. Astin & Werner Z. Hirsch. New York: Praeger, 1978: 133-57.
Astin, Helen S., Nancy Suniewick & Susan Dweck. Women: A Bibliography on Their Education and Careers. New York: Behavioral, 1974.
Babbitt, E.H. "How to Use Modem Languages as a Means of Mental Discipline." PMLA 6 (1891): 52-63.
Bach, Eugenia. "To Stimulate Interest in the Study of German." The German Quarterly 1 (1928): 181-83.
Bagster-Collins, Elijah W. The Teaching of German in Secondary Schools. New York: Columbia UP, 1904.
—. "The History of Modem Language Teaching." Studies in Modem Language Teaching. New York: MacMillan, 1930: 3-96.
—. "Underlying Principles and Aims of Present-day Modem Language Teaching." German Quarterly 5 (1932): 161-77.
Bartow, Beverly. "Isabel Bevier at the University of Illinois and the Home Economics Movement." Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 72 (1979): 21-38.
Bass, Ann T. "The Development of Higher Education for Women in This Country." Contemporary Education 41 (1970): 285-88. 222
Bayer, Alan E. College and University Faculty: A Statistical Description. Washington DC: ACE, 1970.
Bayer, Alan E. & Helen S. Astin. "Sex Differentials in the Academic Reward System." Science 188 (1975): 796-802.
Ben-David, Joseph. American Higher Education: Directions Old and New. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.
Benseler, David P. "A Comprehensive Bibliography of American Doctoral Dissertations on Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, 1861-1972," manuscript in preparation.
—. "The American Language Profession: Toward New Strength, Visibility, and Effectiveness as a Profession." Our Profession: Present Status and Future Directions. Ed. Thomas H. Geno. Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference, 1980: 143-56.
— . "Doctoral Degrees Granted in Foreign Languages in the United States: 1988." M U 73 (1989): 315-31.
Bernard, Jessie. Academic Women. University Park: Penn State UP, 1964.
—. "The Status of Women in Modem Patterns of Culture." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 375 (1968): 3-14.
Berwald, Helen D. "Attitudes Toward Women College Teachers in Institutions of Higher Education Accredited by North Central Association." DAI 23 (1963): 4161.
Blackstone, Tessa & O. Fulton. "Men and Women Academica: An Anglo- American Comparison of Subject Choices and Research Activity." Higher Education. 3 (1974): 119-40.
Blackwell, Jeannine. "Turf Management or Why is the Great Tradition Fading?" Monatshefte 77 (1985): 271-85.
—. "Domesticating the Revolution: The Kindergarten Movement in Germany and America." Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History. Ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F. W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988: 99-119.
Blanckenagel, John C. "Heinrich von Kleist’s Marquise von O..."Germanic Review 6 (1931): 363-72. 223
Bledstein, Burton. The Culture of Professionalism: The MiddleClass and thp Development of Higher Education in America. New York: Norton, 1976.
A Brief Course in German. Ed. Marian P. Whitney & Lilian Stroebe. New York: Holt, 1926, rev. ed. 1927.
Bronson, Walter C. The History of Brown University. 1764-1914 Providence, RI: Brown UP, 1914.
Bronson, Thomas Bertrand. "The Modem Side in College." Educational Review 8 (1894): 147-53.
Brookes, Michael C.T. & Katherine L, German. Meeting the Challenges: Developing Faculty Careers. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Reports 3. Washington: ASHE, 1983.
Brubacher, John S. & Willis Rudy. Higher Education in Transition. A History of American Colleges and Universities. 1636-1968. Rev. & Enl. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.
Brumberg, Joan Jacobs & Nancy Tomes. "Women in the Professions: A Research Agenda for American Historians." Reviews in American History 10 (1982): 275- 96.
Bryan, Alice I. & Edwin G. Boring. "Women in American Psychology: Factors Affecting Their Professional Careers." American Psychologist 2 (1947): 3-20.
Buehne, Sheema. Helen Adolf Festschrift. New York: Ungar, 1968.
Candelaria, Cordelia. "Reflections on Women in the Academy." Rendezvous 1 (1978): 9-18.
Carper, James W. "The Development of Identification with an Occupation." American Journal of Sociology 61 (1956): 289-98.
Carter, Franklin. "Study of Modem Languages in Our Higher Education." PMLA 2 (1886): 3-21.
Carter, Susan B. "Academic Women Revisited: An Empirical Study of Changing Patterns in Women’s Employment as College and University Faculty, 1890-1963." Journal of Social History 14 (1981): 675-91.
Cartter, Allan M. An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education. Washington DC: A.C.E., 1966. 224
Caplow, Theodore and Reece J. McGee. The Academic Marketplace New York: Science Editions, 1961.
Castle, Cora. "A Statistical Study of Eminent Women." New York: Science P, 1913.
Centra, John. Determining Faculty Effictiveness. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass, 1979.
—. Women. Men, and the Doctorate. Princeton: ETS, 1974.
Century of Higher Education: Classical Citadel to Collegiate Colossus. Ed. William W. Brickman & Stanley Lehrer. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1962.
Chafe, William H. The American Woman: Her Changing Social. Economic & Political Roles. 1920-1970. New York: Oxford UP, 1974.
The City College. Memories of Sixty Years. Ed. Philip J. Mosenthal & Charles F. Home. New York: Putnam, 1907.
Clark, Burton R. The Academic Profession: National. Disciplinary, and Institutional Settings. Berkeley: U of California P, 1987.
Clausen, Jeanette. "The Coalition of Women in German: An Interpretive History and Celebration. Women in German Yearbook I: Feminist Studies and German Culture. Eds. Marianne Burkhard & Edith Waldstein. Lanham MD: UP of America, 1985: 1-28.
Clifford, Geraldine Joncich. "Women’s Liberation and Women’s Professions: Reconsidering the Past, Present, and Future." Women in Higher Education in American History. Ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe. New York: Norton, 1988: 165-82.
—. "Introduction." Lone Vovagers. Academic Women in Coeducational Universities. 1870-1937. Ed. Geraldine Joncich Clifford. New York: The Feminist Press, 1989: 1-46.
Coar, J.F. "The Study of Modem Languages and Literatures." Educational Review 25 (1903): 39-48.
Coffman, Bertha Reed. "An Experiment in Motivation." The German Quarterly 5 (1932): 17-20. 225 Cohait, Mary. Unsung Champions of Women. Albuquerque: U of New Mexico P, 1975.
Cohen, A.M. & F.B. Brawer. Measuring Faculty Performance. Washington: AAJC, 1969.
Cole, Steven & Jonathan R. Cole. "The Visibility and the Structural Bases of Awareness of Scientific Research." American Sociological Review 33 (1968): 397- 413.
Conable, Charlotte W. Women at Cornell: The Mvth of Equal Education. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1977.
Converse, Florence. The Story of Wellesley. Boston, 1915.
Cowley, W.H. "A Century of College Teaching." Improving College and University Teaching 1 (1953): 3-10.
Creswell, John W. "Conceptual Explanations of Research Performance." ASHE Reader on Faculty and Faculty Issues in Colleges and Universities. 2nd ed. Ed. Martin J. Finkelstein. Washington: ASHE, 1987: 240-48.
—. "Correlates of Research Performance." ASHE Reader on Faculty and Faculty Issues in Colleges and Universities. 2nd ed. Ed. Martin J. Finkelstein. Washington: ASHE, 1987: 249-62.
Current Issues in Higher Education in a Decade of Decision. Ed. G.K. Smith. Washington: AHE, 1961.
Decennial Index, German Quarterly 10 (1937): 1-39.
"Deutsche Sprache und Germanistik in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika." Zeitschrift fur Kulturaustausch 2 (1985): 167-292.
Diekhoff, J. The Domain of the Faculty in Our Expanding College. New York: Harper, 1956.
Directory of American Scholars. Ed. Jaques Cattell. New York: Bowker, 1957.
Directory of German Departments. German Studies Faculties and Programs in the United States. Ed. Valters Nollendorfs (with Karl Markgraf). New York: DAAD, 1986. 226 Dunaway, Wayland Fuller. History of Pennsylvania State College. State College: Pennsylvania State UP, 1946.
Dunham, Gertrude H. "Notes on Modem Textbooks," German Quarterly 4 (1931): 45-50).
Dunham, Ralph E., Patricia D. Wright & Marjorie O. Chandler. Teaching Faculty in Universities and Four-Year Colleges. Washington: GPO, 1966.
Earnest, Ernest. Academic Procession. An Informal History of the American College. 1636-1953. New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1953.
Easy German Composition with an Abstract of German Grammar, and Present-dav Germany: Deutsch Realien. Ed. Marian P. Whitney & Lilian Stroebe. New York: Holt, 1926, rev. ed. 1939.
Eddy, Peter A. "Present Status of Foreign Language Teaching: A Northeast Conference Survey." Our Profession: Present Status and Future Directions. Ed. Thomas H. Geno Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference 1980: 13-59.
Eells, Walter C. "Earned Doctorates for Women in the Nineteenth Century." AAUP Bulletin 42 (1956): 644-51.
—. "Highest Earned Degrees of Faculty Members in Institutions of Higher Education in the United States, 1954-55." College and University 34 (1958): 5-38.
Elling, Barbara. "German Studies in the United States: Assessment and Outlook." American Attitudes Toward Foreign Languages and Foreign Cultures. Ed. Edward Dudley & Peter Heller. Bonn: Bouvier, 1983: 45-56.
Emerson, Oliver Farrer. "The Chairman’s Address." PMLA 24 (1909): lxxiii-ciii.
Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs. Woman’s Place: Options and Limits in Professional Careers. Berkeley: U of California P, 1971.
"Faculty Training in the Liberal Arts College: A Report of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship." North Central Quarterly 3 (1928): 172-79.
Fallon, Daniel. The German University: A Heroic Ideal in Conflict with the Modem World. Boulder: Colorado Associated UP, 1980.
Fava, Sylvia Fleis. "The Status of Women in Professional Psychology." American Sociological Review 25 (1960): 271-72. 227
Feise, Erast. "Annual Meeting of the MLA." Monatshefte 30 (1938): 28-30.
—. "62nd Annual Meeting of the MLA." Monatshefte 40 (1948): 44-45.
—. "Zu Entstehung, Problem und Technik von Goethes ’Werther’." JEGP 13 (1914): 1-36.
Feldman, S.D. Escape From the Doll’s House: Women in Graduate and Professional School Education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974.
Fickert, Kurt. Letter to author. 18 November 1988.
Fife, Robert H. "On the Teaching of German." Modern Language Journal 5 (1920): 18-27.
—. "To the Members of the American Association of Teachers of German." German Quarterly 5 (1932): 51-53.
Finkelstein, Martin J. The American Academic Profession: A Svsthesis of Social Scientific Inquiry Since World War II. Columbus, Ohio State UP, 1984.
—. "Women and Minority Faculty." ASHE Reader on Faculty and Faculty Issues in Colleges and Universities. 2nd ed. Ed. Martin J. Finkelstein. Washington: ASHE, 1987: 66-97.
Fisher, John H. "Remembrance and Reflection: PMLA 1884-1982." PMLA 99 (1984): 398-407.
Fitzgerald, John D. "National Aspects of Modem Language Teaching in the Present Emergency." Modern Language Journal 3 (1918): 49-62.
Flexner, Abraham. Universities: American. English. German. New York: Oxford UP, 1930.
Follen, Deutsche Lesebuch fur Anfaneer. 1826.
Francke, Kuno. "Modem Ideas in the Middle Ages." PMLA 5 (1890): 175-84.
Frankfort, Roberta. Collegiate Women. Domesticity and Career in Tura-of-the- Centurv America. New York: New York UP, 1977.
Freeman, B.C. "Faculty Women in the American University: Up the Down Staircase." Comparative Perspectives on the Academic Marketplace. Ed. Philip G. Altbach. New York: Praeger, 1977: 166-90. 228
Fuess, Claude Moore Amherst: The Story of a New England College Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1935.
Fulton, Oliver. "Rewards and Fairness: Academic Women in the United States." Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education. Ed. Martin Trow. New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975: 199-248.
— & Martin Trow. "Research Activity in American Higher Education." Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education. Ed. Martin Trow. New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975: 39-83.
Gappa, Judith M. & Barbara S. Uehling. Women in Academe: Steps to Greater Equality. Washington: AAHE, 1979.
German Quarterly 1-21 (1928-49).
German Studies and Women’s Studies: New Directions in Literary and Interdisciplinary Course Approaches. Ed. Sidonie Cassirer & Sydna Stem Weiss, 1983.
German Studies in the United States. Eds. Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1976.
Germanic Review 1-24 (1926-49).
Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Ed. Marian P. Whitney & Lilian Stroebe. New York: Holt, 1913.
Goode, William J. "Community Within a Community: The Professions." American Sociological Review 22 (1957): 195-200.
Goodsell, Willystine. "The Educational Opportunities of American Women - Theoretical and Actual." Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 1-13.
Gordon, Margaret & Clark Kerr. "University Behavior and Policies: Where are the Women and Why?" The Higher Education of Women: Essavs in Honor of Rosemary Park. Ed. Helen S. Astin & Wemer Z. Hirsch. New York: Praeger, 1978: 113-32.
Graham, Patricia. "Women in Academic Life." Annals of the New York Academy of Science 208 (1973): 227-36. 229 —. "So Much to Do: Guides for Historical Research on Women in Higher Education." Teachers College Record 76 (1975): 421-29.
—. "Expansion and Exclusion: A History of Women in American Higher Education." Signs 3 (1978): 759-73.
— . "Women in Academe." Science 169 (1970): 1284-90.
Green, Elizabeth Alden. Marv Lvon and Mount Holvoke: Opening the Gates. (1979).
Griebisch, Max. "Warum die direkte Methode?" Monatshefte 17 (1916): 293-301.
Hagboldt, Peter. The Teaching of German. Boston: Heath, 1940.
—. "The Association of the Central West and South Adopts a New Standard Word List." German Quarterly 4 (1931): 118-23.
Hammond, Geraldine. "And What of Young Women?" AAUP Bulletin 33 (1947): 298-303.
Handschin, Charles Hart. "The Teaching of the Modem Languages in the United States." U.S. Bureau of Education. Bulletin No. 3. Washington: GPO, 1913: 1- 191.
—. "The Question of the Most Economical Learning of the German Vocabulary." Modem Language Journal 17 (1932-33): 195-200.
Harris, Seymor Edwin. A Statistical Portrait of Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.
Hartman, Joan E., Laura Morlock, Jean A. Perkins & Adrian Tinsley. "Study III - Women in Modem Language Departments 1972-73: A Report by the Commission of the Status of Women in the Profession." PMLA 91 (1976): 124-36.
Havighurst, R. American Higher Education in the 1960s. Columbus: Ohio State UP, 1960.
Haussler, Willian. "The Training of a Modem Language Teacher with Special Reference to German." Monatshefte 13 (1912): 141-45.
Hawthorne, Marion O. "Women as College Teachers."Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 146-53. 230
Helen Adolf Festschrift. Ed. Sheema Z. Buehne, James L. Hodge & Lucille B. Pinto. New York: Ungar, 1968.
Hewett, W.T. "The Aims and Methods of Collegiate Instruction in Modem Languages." PMLA 1 (1884): 25-36.
Hildebrand, Janet E. "Methods for Teaching College German in the United States, 1753-1903: An Historical Study." DAI 38 (1978): 3996A (U of Texas).
Hildenbrand, Suzanne. Womens Collections: Libraries. Archives, and Consciousness. New York: Haworth, 1986.
Hohlfeld, Alexander. "To the Members of The American Association of Teachers of German." German Quarterly 6 (1933): 103-05.
Holden, Roxana. "Ten Years of Undergraduate Study Abroad (The ’Junior Year Abroad’)." MLJ 19 (1934-35): 117.
Hooks, Janet. "Women’s Occupations through Seven Decades (1870-1940)." U.S. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau Bulletin 218. Washington: GPO, 1947.
Homig, Lilli S. "Untenured and Tenuous: The Status of WOmen Faculty." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 448 (1980): 115-25.
Horowitz, Helen L. Alma Mater: Design and Experience in the Women’s Colleges from Their Nineteenth-Centurv Beginnings to the 1930s. New York: Knopf, 1984.
Howard, Suzanne. But We Will Persist. A Comparative Research Report on the Status of Women in Academe. Washington: AAUW, 1978.
Howe, Florence. Mvths of Coeducation: Selected Essays. 1964-1983. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1984.
—. "A Report on Women and the Profession." College English 32 (1971): 847- 54.
Howe, Florence & Paul Lauter. The Women’s Movement. Impact on the Campus and Curriculum. Washington: AAHE, 1978.
—. The Impact of Women’s Studies on the Campus and the Disciplines. Washington: NIE, 1980.
Howe, Florence, Laura Morlock & Richard Berk. "The Status of Women in Modem Language Departments: A Report of the Modem Language Association 231 Commission on the Status of Women in the Profession." PMLA 86 (1971): 459- 61.
Hubbart, Henry Clyde. Ohio Wesleyan. First Hundred Years. Ohio Wesleyan UP, 1943.
Hummer, Patricia M. "The Decade of Elusive Promise: Professional Women in the United States, 1920-1933." Studies in American History and Culture 5 (1979): 1-182.
The Idea of the University of Chicago. Selections from the Papers of the First Eight Chief Executives of the University of Chicago from 1891 to 1975. Ed. William Michael Murphy & D.J.R. Bruckner. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1976.
The Importance of Teaching: Report of the Committee on Undergraduate Teaching. Ed. E.C. Rothwell. New Haven, CT: The Hazen Foundation, 1973.
Jackson, Eugene. "Adapting Teaching Methods to Pupil Material" German Quarterly 1 (1928): 81-93.
Jacob, P.E. Changing Values in College. An Exploratory Study of the Impact of College Teaching. New York: Harper, 1957.
Jagemann, H.C.G. von. "On the Use of English in Teaching Foreign Languages." PMLA 1 (1886): 216-26.
Janeway, Elizabeth. Between Mvth and Morning: Women Awakening. New York: Morrow, 1974.
Johnson, Laura B. "Teacher Training Through Participation." MLJ 7 (1922-23): 28-37.
Journal of English and Germanic Philology 1-48 (1897-1949).
Joynes, E.S. "Reading in Modem Language Study." PMLA 5 (1890): 33-46.
Justice, Betty. Toward the Second Decade: the Impact of the Women’s Movement on American Institutions. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1981.
Kaeding, F.W. "Haufigkeitsworterbuch der dutschen Sprache."
Kelly, L.G. 25 Centuries of Language Teaching. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1969. 232
Kilson, Marion. "The Status of Women in Higher Education." Signs 1 (1976): 935-42.
Kind, John L. "Some Phases of First and Second Year College German." German Quarterly 5 (1932): 178-87.
Kinnard, Cynthia D. Antifeminism in American Thought: An Annotated Bibliography. Boston: Hall, 1986.
Kirkpatrick, Wynona Jeanneret. "The Emerging Role of Women in Institutions of Higher Education in the United States," DAI 26 (1965): 797.
Klapper, P. "Professional Preparation of the College Teacher." Journal of General Education 3 (1949): 228-44.
— . "Problems in College Teaching." AAUP Bulletin 36 (1950): 53-63.
Klenze, Camillo von. "The American Association of Teachers of German." German Quarterly 1 (1928): 3-6.
"Korrespondenzen." Monatshefte 21 (1929): 17-18.
Krause, Carl A. "Discussion on Present Conditions and the Direct Method." Monatshefte 11 (1910): 308-10.
—. "The Teaching of Grammar by the Direct Method." Monatshefte 13 (1912): 178-84.
Kreps, Juanita M. "Women in Academia: Today is Different." Women in the Professions. Ed. Laurily Kerr Epstein. Lexington, MA: Heath, 1975: 15-23.
—. "The Woman Professional in Higher Education." Women in Higher Education. Ed. W. Todd Fumiss & Patricia Albjerg Graham. Washington: ACE, 1974: 75-94.
Krichmar, Albert. The Women’s Rights Movement in the United States. 1840- 1970: a Bibliography and Source Book. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow, 1972.
Kroeh, C.F. "Methods of Teaching Modem Languages." PMLA 3 (1888): 169- 85.
Lange, Victor. "The History of German Studies in America: Ends and Means." Monatshefte 75 (1983): 245-56. 233 Lattin, Patricia Hopkins. "Academic Women, Affirmative Action, and Mid- America in the Eighties." Women’s Studies International Forum 6 (1983): 223-30.
Lauter, Paul. "Society and the Profession, 1958-83." PMLA 99 (1984): 414-26.
Lautner, John R. "The Question and Answer Method in Modem Language Teaching." Monatshefte 7 (1906): 197-203.
Lauwers-Rech, Magda. "The Influence of Nazism and World War II on German Studies in the United States." DAI 46 (1986): 3730A (Ohio State U).
Lentz, Harold H. A History of Wittenberg College (1845-1945). Springfield, OH: Wittenberg Press, 1946; rpt. 1970.
Lewis, Lionel. Scaling the Ivorv Tower: Merit and its Limits in Academic Careers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1975.
Light, D.W., Jr., L.R. Mardsen & T.C. Corl. The Impact of the Academic Revolution on Faculty Careers. Washington: AAHE, 1973.
Liptzin, Sol. "Early History of the A.A.T.G. (1926-31)." German Quarterly 12 (1939): 20-23.
Lohn, Ella. "Academic Status of Women on University Faculties." Journal of the American Assocaition of University Women 17 (1924): 5-11.
Lohnes, Walter F.W. "Prolegomena to a History of German Studies in America." Monatshefte 75 (1983): 242-44.
Lossing, Benson J. Vassar College and its Founder. New York: C.A. Alvard, 1867. Lowell, A.L. At War with Academic Traditions in America. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1934.
McMurray, Ruth, Max Muller & Alexander Thomas. "Modem Foreign Languages in France and Germany. The Training of Teachers and Methods of Instruction." GQ 4 (1931): 136-39.
Maglin, Nan Bauer. "Vida to Florence: ’Comrade and Companion’." Frontiers 4 (1979): 13-20.
Making Affirmative Action Work in Higher Education: An Analysis of Institutional and Federal Policies with Recommendations. Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975. 234
Marx, Guido H. "Some Trends in Higher Education." Science 39 (1909): 759- 87.
Mead, Robert G., Jr. "The MLA and the Study of Foreign Languages." PMT.A 99 (1984): 340-55.
Menger, F.J. "Die Direkte Methode in den hoheren Schulen Amerikas." Monatshefte 14 (1913): 248-71.
Meyer, A.E. The Development of Education in the Twentieth Century. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1949.
Miller, Minnie M. "Women in University Teaching." Journal of the American Assocaition of University Women 54 (1961): 152-54.
Minimum Standard German Vocabulary. 1934.
Minorities and Women in Higher Education. Washington: US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1983.
Mitchell, Mildred B. "Status of Women in the American Psychological Association." American Psychologist 6 (1951): 193-201.
The Modem Language Journal 1-33 (1916-49).
Monatshefte 1-41 (1899-49).
Morgan, B.Q. "E Pluribus Unim." M U 9 (1927): 485-88.
—. "German Frequency Word Book."
Morrill, Paul H & Emil R. Spees. The Academic Profession: Teaching in Higher Education. New York: Human Sciences, 1982.
National Research Council. Doctorate Production in U.S. Universities. 1920-1962. National Research Council Publication 1142. Washington: National Academy of Sciences, 1963.
Nelson, E.T. Fifty Years of History of the Ohio Weslevan University. 1844-1894. Cleveland, OH: Cleveland Printing, 1895.
Newcomer, Mabel. A Century of Higher Education for American Women. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. 235 Newmark, Maxim. Twentieth Century Modem Language Teaching. New York: Philosophical Library, 1948.
Nimkoff, Meyer F. & Arthur L. Wood. "Women’s Place Academically." Journal of Higher Education 20 (1949): 28-36.
Noliden. Grammar.
Nollendorfs, Valters. "Practical Approaches to a History of German Studies in America." Monatshefte 75 (1983): 266-70.
—. "History of Teaching German in America." Monatshefte 79 (1987): 289-91.
Nollendorfs, Valters & Carol Amess. "Graduate Programs: Looking Toward the 1990’s." Monatshefte 76 (1984): 311-31.
"Notes and News." Modem Language Journal 5 (1921): 380-81.
"Notice to Members of the American Association of Teachers of German," German Quarterly 7 (1934): 127-28.
Oates Mary J. & Susan Williamson. "Women’s Colleges and Women Achievers." Signs 3 (1978): 795-806.
Ochshom, Judith. "The Contest between Androgyny and Patriarchy in Early Western Tradition." Feminist Visions. Towards a Transformation of the Liberal Arts Curriculum. Ed. Diane L. Fowlkes & Charlotte S. McClure. University, AL: U of Alabama P, 1984: 66-83.
Ohmann, Richard. "An Informal and Perhaps Unreliable Account of the Modem Language Association of America." Antioch Review 29 (1969): 329-47.
Opportunities for Women in Higher Education. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. New York: McGraw Hill, 1973.
Otto, Emil. German Conversation-Grammar: A Practical Method of Learning the German Language. Boston: Kohler, 1901.
Overman, James Robert. The History of Bowling Green State University. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green UP, 1967.
Palmieri, Patricia. "In Adamless Eden: A Social Portrait of the Academic Community at Wellesley College, 1875-1920." DAI 42 (1981): 2822 (Harvard). 236
—. "Here Was Fellowship: A Social Portrait of Academic Women at Wellesley College, 1895-1920." History of Education Quarterly 23 (1983): 195-214.
Park, Rosemary. "Some Considerations on the Higher Education of Women." The Higher Education of Women: Essays in Honor of Rosemary Park. Ed. Helen S. Astin & Werner Z. Hirsch. New York: Praeger, 1978: 3-28.
Parker, Clifford. "The Training of Language Teachers in the Secondary Schools of New Hampshire." M U 19 (1934-35): 401-24.
Parker, William Riley. "The National Interest and Foreign Languages," The Language Curtain. New York: MLA, 1966: 135-66.
—. "The MLA, 1883-1953." PMLA 68 (1953): 3-39.
Patterson, Michelle. "Alice in Wonderland: A Study of Women Faculty in Graduate Departments of Sociology." American Sociologist 6 (1971): 226-34.
Pau On Lau, Estelle. "Ellen Sabin and the Founding of Milwaukee-Downer College." Old Northwest 3 (1977): 39-50.
Pentlin, Susan Lee. "Effect of the Third Reich on the Teaching of German in the United States: A Historical Study." DAI (1977): 7307A (Univ. of Kansas).
—. "Women as Foreign Language Educators, 1920-1960." unpublished paper.
Pidgeon, Mary ELizabeth. Changes in Women’s Occupations. 1940-50. Women’s Bureau Bulletin 253. Washington: GPO, 1954.
PMLA 1-64(1884-1949).
Pollard, Lucille Addison. Women on College and University Faculties. New York: Amo, 1977.
Power, E.J. Main Currents in the History of Education. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1962.
"Preliminary Report of Committee W on the Status of Women in College and University Faculties." Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 7 (1921): 21-32.
Price, Lawrence. "Natural Methods of Teaching German Composition." Monatshefte 16 (1915): 272-80. 237 Price, Thomas R. "The New Function of Modem Language Teaching." PMT.A 16 (1901): 77-91.
Price, William R. "What Price Vocabulary Frequencies?" German Quarterly 2 (1929): 1-5.
Prokosch, Eduard. "Die deutsche Lautverschiebung und die Volkerwanderung." JEGP 16 (1917): 1-27.
Purin, Charles M. "The Importance of Foreign Language Study in the General Scheme of American Education." Modem Language Journal 6 (1920): 325-30.
—. "National Planning for a Unified Program." Monatshefte 32 (1940): 234-45.
—. "Zur psychologischen Begriindung des direktmethodischen Unterrichts in fremden prachen." Monatshefte Jahrbuch (1920): 20-24.
—. "The Training of Modem Foreign Language Teachers in the Light of Investigation Conducted by the Modem Foreign Language Study." MI_J 13 (1928- 29): 15-20.
Raymond, Cornelia M. Memories of a Child of Vassar. Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College, 1940.
Rendel, M. "Men and Women in Higher Education." Educational Review 27 (1974): 192-210.
"Report of the Commission on the Future of the Profession, Spring 1982." PMLA 97 (1982): 940-56.
Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Laneuaees. New York: MLS, 1961. 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92.
Rey, William H. "Colloquium: Oskar Seidlin and ’Oppositional Critisicm.’" Monatshefte 80 (1988): 297-99.
Ridley, Jeanne Clare. "Demographic Change and the Roles and Status of Women," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 375 (1968): 15- 25.
Roedder, Edwin C. "Auf gesetzgebenden Grammatik." Monatshefte 5 (1903-04): 78-86. 238 Rosenberg, Rosalind. Bevond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modem Feminism. New Haven: Yale UP, 1982.
— . "The Limits of Access: The History of Coeducation in America." Women in Higher Education in American History. Ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe. New York: Norton, 1988: 107-29.
Rudolf, Frederick. The American College and University: A History. New York: Knopf, 1962.
Sagendorph, Kent Michigan. The Story of the University New York: Dutton, 1948.
Schmidt, Henry. "Interview with Hermann J. Weigand (1892-1985)." Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History. Ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988: 285-92.
"Rationales and Sources for a History of German Studies in the United States." Monatshefte 75 (1983): 260-65.
—. "What is Oppositional Criticism? Politics and German Literary Criticism from Fascism to the Cold War." Monatshefte 79 (1987): 292-307.
—. "Response to William H. Rey’s ’Offener Brief.’" Monatshefte 80 (1988): 299- 301.
Schmidt, Hugo. "A Historical Survey of the Teaching of German in America." Ed. Eberhard Reichmann. The Teaching of German: Problems and Methods. Philadelphia: NCSA, 1970: 3-7.
Schmidt, G.P. The Liberal Arts College: A Chapter in American Cultural History. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP, 1957.
Schwarz, Egon. "Methodological Approaches to a History of German Studies in the United States." Monatshefte 75 (1983): 257-59.
"Second Report of Committee W on the Status opf Women in Colleges and University Faculties," Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 10 (1924): 563-71.
Sellers, Charles Coleman. Dickinson College. A History. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 1973. 239
Sicherman, Barbara. "College and Careers: Historical Perspectives on the Lives and Work Patterns of Women College Graduates." Women in Higher Education in American History. Ed. John Mack Faragher & Florence Howe. New York: Norton, 1988: 130-64.
Simon, Rita James, Shirley Merritt Clark & Kathleen Galway. "The Woman Ph.D." Social Problems 15 (1967): 221-36.
Skinner, M.M. "Aspects of German Teaching in America." Educational Review 41 (1911): 34-41.
Sklar, Kathryn Kish. Catherine Beecher: A Study in American Domesticity. New Haven: Yale UP, 1973.
— . "The Founding of Mount Holyoke College." Women of America: A History. Ed. Carol Ruth Berkin & Mary Beth Norton. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979: 177-201.
Slosson, Edwin E. Great American Universities. New York: Macmillan, 1910.
Smith, Susan Margot. "Ada Comstock Notestein, Educator." Women of Minnesota: Selected Biographical Essays. Ed. Barbara Stuhler & Gretchen Kreuter. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1977: 208-25,
Sochen, June. Movers and Shakers: American Women Thinkers and Activists. New York: Quadrangle, 1973.
Solano, Marie A. "The Preparation and Qualifications of a Modem Language Te&cher." MLJ (1932-33): 161-72.
Solomon, Barbara Miller. In the Company of Educated Women. New Haven: Yale UP, 1984.
Sommerkom, Ingrid. "On the Position of Women in the University Teaching Profession." Diss. U of London, 1967.
Spuler, Richard "Germanistik" in America: The Reception of German Classicism. 1870-1905. Diss. Ohio State U, 1981. Stuttgarter Arbeiten zur Germanistik 115. Stuttgart: Heinz, 1982.
Stadtman, Veme A. The University of California. 1868-1968 New York: McGraw- Hill, 1970. 240 Stameshkin, David M. The Town’s College: Middleburv College. 1800-1915. Middlebury VT: Middlebury College Press, 1985.
Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington: GPO, 1929-49.
"Status of Women in College and University Faculties." School and Society 21 (1925): 16-17.
Stimpson, Catherine R. "The New Scholarship About Women: The State of the Art." Annals of Scholarship 1 (1980): 2-14.
—. "Women as Knowers." Feminist Visions. Towards a Transformation of the Liberal Arts Curriculum. Ed. Diane L. Fowlkes & Charlotte S. McClure. University: U of Alabama P, 1984: 15-24.
Stone, George Winchester. "The Beginning, Development, and Impact of the MLA as a Learned Society." PMLA 73 (1958): 23-44 (75th anniversary issue).
Strober, Myra H. and David B. Tyack. "Why do Women Teach and Men Manage? A Report of Research on Schools" Signs 5 (1980): 494-503.
Stroebe, Lilian. "Marian P. Whitney. In Memoriam." Monatshefte 38 (1945/46): 371-74.
—. The Teaching of German at Vassar College in Peace and War. A Retrospect. 1905-1943. Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College, 1944.
—. "The Real Knowledge of a Foreign Country." M U 5 (1920-21): 38-44.
—. "Summer Schools for Modern Languages." Education 39 (1918-19): 305-16.
—. "Organization and Management of Summer Schools for Foreign Language." Education 39 (1918-19):356-66,
—. "The Conversation Lesson and the German Background." German Quarterly 2 (1929): 54-62.
—. "The Summer School as a Wartime Substitute for Study Abroad" Bulletin of the New England Modem Language Association 1918.
—. "The Real Knowledge of a Foreign Country." M U 5 (1920-21): 38-44, 93- 101.
—. "How to Plan A Grammar Lesson." Monatshefte 21 (1929): 10. 241 —. "How to Prepare a Reading Lesson." Monatshefte 21 (1929): 42.
—. "How to Prepare a Review Lesson." Monatshefte 22 (1930): 13-18,
—. "Reading Comprehension Tests." The German Quarterly 3 (1930): 79-94.
—. "The Use of Pictures as Illustrative Material in Modem Language Teaching." Education 43 (1923): 363-72.
Taylor, James Monroe. Before Vassar Opened: A Contribution to the History of the Higher Education of Women in America 1914; rpt. Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries, 1972.
Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History. Ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988.
Teaching in the Universities. Ed. E.F. Sheffield Montreal: McGill Queens UP, 1974.
Tead, Ordway. Trustees. Teachers. Students: Their Role in Higher Education. Salt Lake City: U of Utah P, 1961.
The Two Ends of the Log: Learning and Teaching in Today’s College. Ed. R.M. Cooper. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1958.
Thomas, M. Carey. "Present Tendencies in Women’s Education." Educational Review 35 (1908): 64-85.
Thorndike, Edward L. "Learning Rules in the Study of a Foreign Language." German Quarterly 4 (1931): 89-95.
Thwing, Charles F. A History of Higher Education in America. New York: Appleton, 1906.
—. The American and the German University. One Hundred Years of History. New York: Macmillan, 1928.
Tobais, Sheila. "Women’s Studies: Its Origins, Its Organization and Its Prospects." Women’s Studies International Quarterly 1 (1978): 85-97.
Toward a Feminist Transformation of the Academy. I. II. Ed. Beth Reed. Ann Arbor: Women’s Studies Program, Great Lakes Colleges Association, 1980, 1981. 242
Trow, Martin & Oliver Fulton. "Research Activity in American Higher Education." Teachers and Students. Aspects of American Higher Education. Ed. Matrtin Trow. New York: Carnegie Foundation, 1975: 39-83.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education. Biennial Survey of Education: Statistics of Universities. Colleges, and Schools. 1948-1950. Washington: GPO, 1950.
U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Labor Standards Administration, Women’s Bureau. Trends in Educational Attainment of Women. Washington: US Department of Labor, 1969.
"Umschau der Schriftleitung." Monatshefte 23 (1931): 180-81.
Umstattd, J.G. College Teaching: Background. Theory. Practice. Washington: UP of Washington, 1964.
Vail, Curtis. Editorial letter. The German Quarterly 17 (1944): 40-42.
VanAlstyne, Carol, Julie S. Withers & Sharon A. Elliott. "Affirmative Inaction: The Bottom Line Tells the Tale." Change 9 (1977): 39-43.
Veysey, Laurence R. The Emergence of the American University. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1965.
Viereck, Louis. "German Instruction in American Schools." US Bureau of Education. Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1900-1901. Washington: GPO, 1902: 531-708.
Viles, John The University of Missouri Columbia: U of Missouri P, 1939.
Vinovskis Maris A. & Richard M. Bernard. "Beyond Catherine Beecher: Female Education in the Atnebellum Period." Signs 3 (1978): 856-69.
Vos, B.J. Essentials of German. (New York: Holt, 1913).
Wagley, C. & M. Harris. Minorities in the New World: Six Case Studies. New York: Columbia UP, 1958.
Walz, John A. German Influence in American Education and Culture. Philadelphia: Carl Schurz Memorial Foundation, 1936.
Weigel, John C. "The Reorganization of Teachers’ Training in German in our Colleges and Universities." Monatshefte 17 (1916): 16, 34. 243
"Weighted Average Salary for Men and Women Faculty by Category, Type of Affiliation, Academic Rank, and Sex, 1983-84." "Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession 1983-84." Academe 70 (1984): 12.
Weiss, Gerhard. "From New York to Philadelphia: Issues and Concerns of the American Association of Teachers of German between 1926 and 1970." Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History. Ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988: 215-27.
Westervelt, Esther Manning, Deborah A. Fixter & Margaret Comstock. Women’s Higher and Continuing Education: An Annotated Bibliography with Selected References on Related Aspects of Women’s Lives. New York: CEEB, 1971.
Whitney, Marian P. "National Ideals and the Teaching of Modem Languages." Modem Language Journal 3 (1918): 5-13.
Wilson, L., ed. Emerging Patterns in American Higher Education. Washington: ACE, 1965.
Wilson, Kenneth M. Selected Data Pertaining to the Higher Education of Women. Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College Research Center, 1967.
Women in Higher Education. Ed. W. Todd Fumiss & Patricia Albjerg Graham. Washington: ACE, 1974.
Women of America. A History. Ed. Carol Ruth Berkin & Mary Beth Norton. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979.
Woodbury, W.H. A New Method of Learning the German Language. Embracing both the Analytic and Synthetic Modes of Instruction. New York: Newman, 1851.
Woody, Thomas. A History of Women’s Education in the United States. 2 Vols. New York: Science, 1929,
Zeydel, Edwin H. "The Teaching of German in the United States from Colonial Times to the Present." Reports of Surveys and Studies in the Teaching of Modem Foreign Languages. New York: MLA, 1961: 285-308; rpt. German Quarterly 37 (1964): 315-92; partial rpt. Teaching German in America. Prolegomena to a History. Ed. David P. Benseler, Walter F.W. Lohnes & Valters Nollendorfs. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1988: 15-54.
Zimmer-Loew, Helene, Executive Director of the AATG. Letter to author. 8 December 1989.