THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE A HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OFFICE OF EDUCATION, I8 6 7 -I967 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY LEONARD GLENN SMITH Norman, Oklahoma 1967 A HISTORY OF IHE UNITED STATES OFFICE OF EDUCATION, I867-I967 APPROVED BY DISSERTATION COMMITTEE For Frank and Letha Smith ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have incurred many obligations for assistance in developing what is set forth in this volume. Professor Franklin Parker first called my attention to the need for this study in 1964. He also gave many kinds of help, including several critical readings of the manuscript. His wife, Betty June Parker, read most of the chapters, saving me from a number of stylistic weaknesses. Dean John S. Ezell suggested several improvements especially in the earlier chapters. Professors Lloyd P. Williams and William Horosz offered encouragement throughout my doctoral program, including this dissertation. My wife, Mona Jeanne Smith, typed the preliminary drafts, read all of the work several times, and eliminated a number of errors. I am endebted to Mr. Boyd Gunning, of the University of Oklahoma Alumni Development Fund, and to Dean Carl D. Riggs, of the University of Oklahoma Graduate College, for grants which made the research possible. Some of the material contained herein appeared in the Educational Forum and is reproduced by permission. IV Many librarians, archivists, and government offi­ cials showed me more kindness than their positions required. To most of these people I can do nothing more than tender an inadequate collective thanks. A few, however, must be singled out. Mr. Robert M. Kvasnicka, Mr. Joseph Howerton, and Mrs. Jo Ann Stockwell led me to the sources in the National Archives. Mr. John Dobson and his assistant. Miss Freya Ryan, at the University of Tennessee Library showed me many courtesies, and Mrs. Laura A. Rucker, Information and Interlibrary Loan Librarian, University of Oklahoma, procured dozens of books and articles which would have otherwise been inaccessible. Dr. Jack Whealen, historian of the U. S. Office of Education, secured budgetary and appropriations data which I could not have gotten without his aid. Except for routine courtesies by employees, the Office of Education had no part in the study. I alone accept full responsibility for the contents, form, inter­ pretations , and conclusions which follow. Leonard Glenn Smith Norman, Oklahoma May 5, 1967 PREFACE ■ ~ Only two nations of significant size and power in the contemporary world do not have national ministeries of education. Australia is one; the United States is the other, Instead of a Ministry of Education, the United States has a non-cabinet-level Office of Education, created on March 2, 1 8 6 7 . This Office has had an uncertain career. For the better part of a hundred years, it has been searching for its proper role. Sponsored by radical Republicans and a number of educational leaders who shared their view about the causes of the Civil War, it was originally intended to act as an information agency for Congress in reconstructing the South. It limped along as a small, obscure agency for many years. Except for supervising schools for the natives of Alaska from I885 to 1931> it had few administrative duties. But two world wars, the Depression, and cold-war tensions brought numerous federal education programs into being and gradually expanded the size and influence of the Office. Since World War II, Congress has assigned to it the administration of large sums of money. By 1967 it had a budget of #3*9 billion and was a key agency in President Johnson's Great Society program. vi This work describes the early sentiment in favor of an office of education, the congressional debates persuant to its creation, the difficulties and mistakes of the first Commissioner of Education, Henry Barnard, and the construc­ tive efforts of the second Commissioner, John Baton, in saving it—from extinction. The background, training, attitudes, and programs of each of the succeeding fifteen commissioners are also treated in some detail. Barnard and Eaton were followed by N. H. R. Dawson, W. T. Harris, Elmer Ellsworth Brown, Philander P. Claxton, John J. Tigert, William John Cooper, George F. Zook, John W. Studebaker, Earl J. McGrath, Lee Thurston, Samuel M. Brownell, Lawrence G. Derthick, Sterling McMurrin, Francis Keppel, and Harold Howe II. Attention is given to several key projects under­ taken by the Office during its first one hundred years; John Eaton's monumental study of American libraries in 1 8 7 6 , the thirty-six volume history of American education under Dawson, the activities of the Office in Alaska, the suppressed Babcock report on graduate training in the United States, the elimination of fraudulent institutions of higher education (with special reference to "Oriental University"), the Federal Forum project under Studebaker, and attempts in the 1 9 6 0 's at national curriculum reform. Further, the study describes some of the more important Office conflicts, such as the Studebaker-Ewing dispute vii and the efforts by the Office to speed racial integration in the schools from I965 to 19 6 7 . The Office is also viewed in centennial perspective, and its current strengths and weaknesses are analyzed. The sources on which this history is based are varied. Much of the material for the early chapters is drawn from the private papers of the commissioners, the Office of Education letter press in the National Archives, and government documents. Unfortunately, no papers for Elmer Ellsworth Brown, William John Cooper, or George F. Zook are extant. The papers of John J. Tigert were not available at the time this study was finished, though they may soon be. The difficulty of obtaining reliable informa­ tion on the period from 1921 to 19^5 has been compounded by the fact that the Office of Education records in the National Archives are by no means complete. Data on the period from 19^5 to I967 have been drawn from interviews; magazine, journal, and newspaper articles; and the incom­ plete records of the Office of Education in the Federal Records Center, Alexandria, Virginia. Because of the limitations of time, several aspects of this study are much less complete than the author would have liked. Developments in the Office, for example, have not been related in detail to general social, economic, cultural, and educational changes of the country. The development of vocational education, in which the Office vixi played a significant role, has not been explored nearly so thoroughly as the material warrants. And several recent developments, such as the I965 Chicago funds withholding incident, have received far briefer treatment than they deserve. Despite these limitations, the author hopes that this study shows the chronological development of the Office of Education through the work of its commissioners, and that it indicates not only the early difficulties of the Office, but the role of the Office as a political organization. If educators come to understand the inevitable political dimensions of the Office, a chief purpose of this study will have been realized and educators can better appreciate its strengths and weaknesses. Note on Citations Full bibliographic use has been made in footnote citations of such abbreviations as ibid. and op. cit. Each chapter, however, is treated as a separate unit, and all citations are given in full the first time they appear in any given chapter with the following two excep­ tions: The Dictionary of American Biography is cited throughout as simply DAB, with appropriate entry, volume, and page; and material from Record Group 12 of the National Archives, Washington, D.C. is cited, with appropriate finding aids, as RG 12. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................... iv PREFACE ............................................ vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.............................. xiv Chapter I. THE FOUNDING ............................ 1 Early Proposals Civil War Conditions Charles Brooks' Plan Emerson E. White's Petition James A. Garfield's Support The Congressional Debate 11. THE INAUGURATION OF THE DEPARTMENT, 1867-1870..................................... 21 Henry Barnard Trouble with Edward D. Neill Trouble with Congress The First Annual Report Congressional Reaction and Barnard's Resignation 1 1 1 . THE BUREAU REBUILT, I87O-I8 8 6 .............. 44 John Eaton The Bureau in I87O Eaton's First Annual Report Eaton's Major Contributions Eaton's Later Career TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued Chapter Page IV. THE N. H. R. DAWSON INTERLUDE, 1886-1 8 8 9 . ............ ....... 66 Grover Cleveland's Election N. H. R. Dawson Educators' Response to Dawson Dawson's Alaska Trip Herbert Baxter Adams' Contributions to American Educational History Dawson's Reluctant Resignation V. THE REIGN OF WILLIAM TORREY HARRIS, 1889-1906.......................... 89 William Torrey Harris Harris' Conservatism Administrative Deterioration Move for an Independent Department Harris ' Resignation VI. REVITALIZATION OF THE BUREAU, 1906-1911......................................... 110 Elmer Ellsworth Brown Brown's Reception in Washington Bureau Reorganization Attempts to Secure Increased Appropriations Brown's Resignation and Later Career Vll. EXPANSION OF THE BUREAU, 1911-1921 ..... I3I President Taft's Search for a Commissioner Philander Priestley Claxton Claxton's Expansion Plans The Suppressed Babcock Report Wartime Expansion