THE EVOLUTION OF ANTHROPOLOGY IN EDUCATION: A REVIEW OF THE HISTORICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ANTHROPOLOGY AND EDUCATION AND THE IMPLICATION FOR ANTHROPOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTION TO GENERAL EDUCATION by Charles Arthur McGill A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Social Science in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Teaching Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida THE EVOLUTION OF ANTHROPOLOGY IN EDUCATION: A REVIEW OF THE HISTORICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ANTHROPOLOGY AND EDUCATION AND THE IMPLICATION FOR ANTHROPOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTION TO GENERAL EDUCATION by Charles Arthur McGill This thesis was prepared under the direction of the candidate's thesis advisor, Dr. William H. Sears, Department of Anthropology, and has been approved by the members of his supervisory committee. It was submitted to the faculty of the College of Social Science and was accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Teaching. ~· .. ltls"" ed Studies dat~~~ ii ABSTRACT Author: Charles Arthur McGill Title: The Evolution of Anthropology in Education: A Review of the Historical Relationship Between Anthropology and Education and the Implication for Anthropological Contribution to General Education Institution: Florida Atlantic University Degree: Master of Arts in Teaching Year: 1975 It is the contention of this paper that in the future more and more students in the undergraduate survey courses will be introduced to Anthropology; concomitantly students approaching teaching in the field of Social Studies are doing so with a background of anthropology. Anthropology's growth has precipitated its incorporation in undergraduate requirements for students majoring in Social Science and Education. This paper will explore the ways in which anthropology has established inroads in education and their importance to future developments in our school systems. A review of anthropological theories of educational systems is combined with the problems or restrictions facing an Anthropological Education liaison. In conclusion we centered discussion on whether or not anthropologists can change the school systems with an explanation of ACSP and NSF projects produced under their auspices. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ••• . iii INTRODUCTION . 1 Historical Background . 2 PART I THE ANTHROPOLOGIST'S VIEW OF EDUCATION ••• 21 PART II CAN ANTHROPOLOGISTS EFFECT CHANGE IN THE SCHOOLS? 31 CONCLUSION • . 38 A Fundamental Paradox 38 APPENDIX I •• 42 APPENDIX II 49 BIBLIOGRAPHY • 55 iv INTRODUCTION For the fact is that what we colloquially call mass education is a failure. And more mass education will not make it a success. What is needed is a qualitative, not a quantitative change. (Diamond 1971:303) For the most part of its development anthropology has been popularly associated with museums and universities of the super- intellects. Few students have known anything about its actual subject matter until they reached introductory courses in anthropology at the college level. It is the contention of this paper that (due to recent conditions and developments to be discussed later) in the future more and more students in the introductory courses will have prior knowledge about anthropology. The evidence as I see it shows anthropology currently reaching an all time high in public awareness. Concurrently more and more students approaching teaching in the field of social studies are doing so with a background in anthropology. Further, there is evidence that anthropology is being incorporated in undergraduate requirements. Coincidental with its public debut, anthropology has also reached into the public schools. Public awareness has heightened its reception and the speed with which it has infiltrated. This paper will explore the ways in which anthropology has invaded the school system, from public school to college undergraduate 1 2 requirements, and its relative importance to future developments. Bailey (1973:67) has contended that anthropology has invaded the schools in three ways: l. Anthropology has assumed an important role in teacher education. This has evolved through regular courses in anthropology departments and courses tvith anthropological· content taught in t-lhat are sometimes called departments of social foundations of education. 2, Anthropologists and others utilizing anthropological techniques are studying educational systems and classrooms as structures to transmit culture. 3. A multitude of curriculum materials now exist, developed to facilitate the teaching of anthropology at a variety of grade levels. Bailey's focus \vas only \-rith the curriculum production of these contentions. This paper is concerned with elaborating on all three aspects and illustrating the growing recognition of anthropology in the academic field. Further, I will attempt to show ho\v our methodology is helpful in research and problems outside of our particular discipline. Historical Background An exploration of the early history of anthropology and its influence in the universities Anthropology \vas first instroduced at Harvard University and Clark University in 1888 and 1889. At Harvard the start was archaeological and somatological, for it was based on a program from the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology. At Clark University anthropology 't-Tas introduced as a branch of psychology. Consequently particular stress was laid upon the mental process, and upon the psychological aspects of ethnological problems (Nicholson 68:133). 3 At Yale, Professor Sumner developed anthropological studies from a sociological point of view as an outgrowth of the Department of Political and Social Science, with the first course emerging in 1885. At Columbia University in New York, ethnology was first introduced in 1893, in the psychology department. At the same time special courses on the development of the races were established in the political science department and in 1896 physical anthropology was introduced in the pure science department (Cyclopedia of Education 1911:133). By 1902 anthropology had developed in American universities in such a way that, of thirty-one universities and colleges offering more or less systematic courses in anthropology it was affiliated with sociology in nine, with philosophy in five, with medicine in one institution. In eight institutions anthropology was offered without special affiliations with other subjects (Cyclopedia of Education 1911:132, 34). Many American colleges had introduced full courses or partial courses in anthropology. The general tendency was to use the subject matter of anthropology to develop the idea of the evolution of modern society from primitive forms. These courses were generally electives and their correlation with other subjects was inadequate. The general function of these courses was to expose the student to a wider view of history than is possible from a consideration of the history of the European race alone (Nicholson 68:133,ff). Attempts were made during the late 1890's and early 1900's 4 to utilize the results of anthropology studies for the purposes of elementary and secondary education. The theory of recapitulation was stressed, according to which the development of the child would follow, in a way, the general evolution of civilization (Cyclopedia 1911:133). The occupations of the young child were similar to the manifestations of life among primitive people, while with increasing age the complexity of occupations was to increase in a way comparable to the development of culture. This point of view was somewhat short-lived, but the inclination to utilize anthropological materials in the early stages of manual training and also in connection with the teaching of geography, history and literature has remained strong. The early history of anthropology as an independent discipline in the grade school classroom is hard to pinpoint. With the exception of history and geography, social science classes have merged into one discipline usually termed social studies. Human relations subjects had no identity as such and were simply absorbed into the single discipline. However, anthropological materials were utilized in a wide variety of ways (Cyclopedia 1911:132-34). Many of the earlier world history texts open with a discussion of human origins and periods before the early rise of civilization. Man was first a savage, then a barbarian, and finally a civilized being. The savage depends almost entirely on nature. He secures food from wild plants and wild animals, he knows nothing of metals but makes his tools and weapons of stone, wood, and bone; he wears little or no clothing; his home is merely a cave, a rock shelter, or a hut of bark. Such primitive folk still live in the interior of Africa and Australia. The barbarian has gained more 5 control over nature than the savage. He plants seeds, has domesticated animals and uses some metal implements. Most of the American Indians before the coming of Columbus and most of the Negroes in Africa may be classified as barbarians. (Mayer [quoting Heath, "Record of Mankind"] 62:116) This text fails to make use of cultural concepts and the material is of questionable accuracy; greatly 'oversimplified' is a better description. Many American histories contained units on the ~~erican Indian. I find, however, that much of this material is poorly written, inaccurate and oversimplified. Anthropological concepts such as culture, culture change, and diffusion were left either unmentioned or unexplored. These early educators