Education of Women — Story, Setting & Ideas

already being educated with boys in all the high schools of the west, and not to admit them to the state universities would have been to break with tradition. Women were also firmly established as teachers in the secondary schools and it was patent to all thoughtful men that they must be given opportunities for higher education, if only for the sake of the secondary education of the boys of the country.[4] The development of women’s education in the east has followed a different course because there were in the east no state universities, and the private colleges for men had been founded before women were suffered to become either pupils or teachers in schools. The admission of women to the existing eastern colleges was, therefore, as much an innovation as it would have been in Europe. The coeducation of men and women in colleges, and at the same time the college education of women, began in Ohio, the earliest settled of the western states. In 1833 Oberlin collegiate institute (not chartered as a college until 1850) was opened, admitting from the first both men and women. Oberlin was at that time, and is now, hampered by maintaining a secondary school as large as its college department, but it was the first institution for collegiate instruction in the United States where large numbers of men and women were educated together, and the uniformly favorable testimony of its faculty had great influence on the side of coeducation. In 1853 Antioch college, also in Ohio, was opened, and admitted from the beginning men and women on equal terms. Its first president, Horace Mann, was one of the most brilliant and energetic educational leaders in the United States, and his ardent advocacy of coeducation, based on his own practical experience, had great weight with the public.[5] From this time on it became a custom, as state universities were opened in the far west, to admit women. Utah, opened in 1850, Iowa, opened in 1856, Washington, opened in 1862, Kansas, opened in 1866, Minnesota, opened in 1868, and Nebraska, opened in 1871, were coeducational from the outset. Indiana, opened as early as 1820, admitted women in 1868. The state University of Michigan was, at this time, the most important western university, and the only western university well known in the east before the war. When, in 1870, it opened its doors to women, they were for the first time in America admitted to instruction of true college grade. The step was taken in response to public sentiment, as shown by two requests of the state legislature, against the will of the faculty as a whole. The example of the University of Michigan was quickly followed by all the other state universities of the west. In the same year women were allowed to enter the state universities of Illinois and California; in 1873 the only remaining state university closed to women, that of Ohio, admitted them. Wisconsin which, since 1860, had given some instruction to women, became in 1874 unreservedly coeducational. All the state universities of the west, organized since 1871, have admitted women from the first. In the twenty states which, for convenience, I shall classify as western, there are now twenty state universities open to women, and, in four territories, Arizona, Oklahoma, Indiana and New Mexico, the one university of each territory is open to women. Of the eleven state universities of the southern states the two most western admitted women first, as was to be expected. Missouri became coeducational as early as 1870, and the University of Texas was opened in 1883 as a coeducational institution. Mississippi admitted women in 1882, Kentucky in 1889, Alabama in 1893, South Carolina in 1894, North Carolina in 1897, but only to women prepared to enter the junior and senior years, West Virginia in 1897.[6] The state universities of Virginia, Georgia and Louisiana are still closed. The one state university existing outside the west and south, that of Maine, admitted women in 1872.

The greater part of the college education of the United States, however, is carried on in private, not in state universities. In 1897 over 70 per cent of all the college students in the United States were studying in private colleges, so that for women’s higher education their admission to private colleges is really a matter of much greater importance. The part taken by Cornell university in New York state in opening private colleges to women was as significant as the part taken by Michigan in opening state universities. Cornell is in a restricted sense a state university, inasmuch as part of its endowment, like that of the state universities, is derived from state and national funds. Nevertheless, there is little reason to suppose that Cornell would have admitted women had it not been for the generosity of Henry W. Sage, who offered to build and endow a large hall of residence for women at Cornell university. After carefully investigating coeducation in all the institutions where it then existed, and especially in Michigan, the trustees of the university admitted women in 1872. The example set by Cornell was followed very slowly by the other private colleges of the New England and middle states. For the next twenty years the colleges in this section of the United States admitting women might be counted on the fingers of one hand. In Massachusetts Boston university opened its department of arts in 1873, and admitted women to it from the first; but no college for men followed the example of Boston until 1883, when the Massachusetts institute of technology, the most important technical and scientific school in the state, and one of the most important in the United States, admitted women. This school, like Cornell, is supported in part from state and national funds. Very recently, in 1892, Tufts college was opened to women. In the west and south the case is different, and the list of private colleges that one after another have become coeducational is too long to be inserted here. Among new coeducational foundations the most important are, on the Pacific coast, the Leland Stanford junior university, opened in 1891, and, in the middle west, Chicago university, opened in 1892. To show the differing attitude toward coeducation of the different sections of the United States, I have arranged the 480 coeducational colleges and separate colleges for men given in the U.S. education report for 1897–98 in a table on the opposite page. In matters like women’s education, which are powerfully affected by prejudice and conservative opinion, we find not only a sharp cleavage in opinion and practice between the west and the east of the United States, but also distinct phases of differing opinion, corresponding in the main to the old geographical division of the states into New England, middle, southern and western.[7]

I _20 western states and 3 territories_

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ STATES Total Coed. Men only no. cols. ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Ohio 35 29 3 R. C., 1 Luth., 1 P. E., Western reserve. Indiana 14 9 2 R. C., 1 Luth., 1 Cong., Wabash college. Illinois 31 24 5 R. C., 1 Ger. Ev., Illinois college. Michigan 11 10 1 R. C. Wisconsin 10 7 1 R. C., 1 Luth., 1 Dutch Reformed. Minnesota 9 7 1 R. C., 1 Luth. Iowa 22 20 2 Luth. North Dakota 3 3 South Dakota 6 6 Nebraska 12 11 1 R. C. (professional dept. open) Kansas 19 17 2 R. C. Montana 3 3 Wyoming 1 1 Colorado 4 3 1 R. C. Arizona 1 1 Utah 2 2 Nevada 1 1 Idaho 1 1 Washington 9 7 2 R. C. Oregon 8 8 California 12 9 3 R. C. Indian 2 2 Territory Oklahoma 1 1 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── 217 182 22 R. C., 6 Luth., 1 Ger. Ev., 1 Dutch Ref., 1 P. E., 1 Cong. ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

II _14 southern and 2 southern middle states_

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ STATES Total Coed. Men only no. cols. ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Delaware 2 1 Delaware college. (The one coeducational college is for negroes.) Maryland 11 4 4 R. C., St. John’s, Maryland agric. college, Johns Hopkins. District of 6 3 3 R. C. Columbia Virginia 10 4 2 M. E. So., Univ. of Virginia, Hampden-Sidney, Washington and Lee, William and Mary. West Virginia 3 3 North Carolina 15 10 1 R. C., 2 Presb., 1 Luth., 1 Bapt. South Carolina 9 7 1 A. M. E., College of Charleston. Georgia 11 6 2 Bapt., 1 A. M. E., 1 M. E. So., Univ. of Georgia, Florida 6 5 1 R. C. Kentucky 13 9 1 R. C., 1 Bapt., 1 Presb., Ogden college. Tennessee 24 20 1 R. C., 2 Presb., 1 P. E. (Univ. of South.) Alabama 9 7 2 R. C. Mississippi 4 2 1 Bapt., 1 M. E. So. Louisiana 9 3 2 R. C., 1 M. E. So., 1 Cong., Louisiana State univ., Tulane. Texas 16 12 3 R. C., 1 Presb. Arkansas 8 8 Missouri 26 21 3 R. C., 1 Bapt., 1 Presb. ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── 182 125 21 R. C., 5 M. E. So., 6 Bapt., 7 Presb., 1 Luth., 2 A. M. E., 1 P. E., 1 Cong. ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

III _6 New England and 3 northern middle states_

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ STATES Total Coed. Men only no. cols. ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Maine 4 2 1 Bapt. (Colby, limited coed.), Bowdoin New Hampshire 2 1 R. C., 1 Cong. (Dartmouth) Vermont 3 2 Norwich university Massachusetts 9 2 2 R. C., 2 Cong. (Amherst), Harvard, Williams, Clark Rhode Island 1 Brown Connecticut 3 1 1 P. E. (Trinity), Yale New York 23 5 8 R. C., 2 P. E. (Hobart), 1 Bapt. (Colgate), Polytechnic institute of Brooklyn, Hamilton, College of City of New York (boys’ high school), Columbia, Union, Rochester, New York university New Jersey 4 2 R. C., 1 Dutch Ref. (Rutgers), Princeton Pennsylvania 32 17 4 R. C, 1 Luth., 1 Moravian, 1 Friends (Haverford), 1 Dutch Ref. (Franklin & Marshall), Pennsylvania military college, Philadelphia central high school (boys’ high school), Lehigh university, University of Pennsylvania, 3 Presb. (Lafayette, Washington & Jefferson, Lincoln) ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── 81 29 17 R. C., 1 Luth., 3 P. E., 3 Cong., 3 Presb., 2 Bapt., 1 Friends, 2 Dutch Ref., 1 Moravian (The Univ. of Penna. admits women to many departments, but not to full undergraduate work leading to the bachelor’s degree) ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

In the western states it will be observed there are, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, out of 195 colleges 182 coeducational and only 13 colleges for men only. All of these except 3 are denominational; 6 belong to the Lutheran, 1 to the Dutch Reformed, 1 to the German Evangelical, 1 to the Episcopalian, and 1 to the Congregationalist. The other 3 are, as we might expect, in the most eastern and the earliest settled of the western states; one in Ohio, Western reserve, which teaches women in a separate women’s college; one in Indiana, Wabash college, one of the three most important colleges in Indiana; and one in Illinois, Illinois college. Roman Catholic institutions apart, in 14 states and all 3 territories every college for men is open to women (the one university of the territory of New Mexico, not included in the U. S. education report, is open to women). In the southern states and southern middle states there are, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, out of 161, 125 coeducational and only 36 colleges for men only. Among these 36, however, are the most important educational institution in Maryland, the Johns Hopkins university; the most important in Georgia, the University of Georgia; in Louisiana the two most important, the Louisiana state university and Tulane university, and in Virginia the very important University of Virginia.[8] Roman Catholic institutions apart, all the colleges in the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida and West Virginia are coeducational. In New England and the northern middle states out of 64 colleges, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, only 29, or less than half, are coeducational. The colleges for men only include (with the exception of Cornell) all the largest undergraduate colleges in this section—Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, Pennsylvania. Maine and Vermont are liberal to women, 2 colleges (3 if we count the limited coeducational college of Colby) in Maine and 3 in Vermont being coeducational, but the total number of students in college in these states is very small (in Maine only 843 men and 189 women; in Vermont only 301 men and 99 women). The leading colleges of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey and Pennsylvania are closed, and in Massachusetts only 2 are open and 7 closed.[9]

Of the four hundred and eighty colleges for men enumerated by the commissioner of education 336, or 70 per cent (or, excluding Catholic colleges, 80 per cent), admit women. It would be misleading, however, to count among American institutions for higher education, properly so-called, most of the coeducational colleges and separate colleges for men included in this list, and it would be equally misleading to compare the number of women studying in such colleges in the United States with the number of women engaged in higher studies in England, France and Germany.[10] In order to obtain a better idea of opportunities for true collegiate work open to women at the present time in the United States I have selected from these four hundred and eighty colleges and from the numerous colleges for women classified elsewhere, a list of fifty-eight colleges properly so-called, employing for the purpose the four means of classification most likely to commend themselves to the impartial student of such things.[11] Of these fifty-eight colleges four are independent colleges for women and three women’s colleges affiliated to colleges for men; of the remaining 51, 30, or 58.8 per cent, are coeducational, and a nearer examination makes a much more favorable showing for coeducation. Of the 21 colleges closed to women in their undergraduate departments five have affiliated to them a women’s college through which women obtain some share in the undergraduate instruction given, the affiliated colleges in three cases being of enough importance to appear in the same list. Of these five, four (all but Harvard) admit women without restriction to their graduate instruction, and in addition Yale, the University of Pennsylvania and New York university make no distinction between men and women in graduate instruction. The Johns Hopkins university maintains a coeducational medical school. In this list then of fifty-eight, which includes all the most important colleges in the United States, there are, apart from the two Catholic colleges, only ten (Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Clark, Princeton, Lehigh, Lafayette, Hamilton, Colgate, Virginia, all situated on the Atlantic seaboard) to which women are not admitted in some departments. Princeton is the only one of the large university foundations that excludes women from any share whatsoever in its advantages. The diagram on the opposite page shows the steady progress of coeducation from 1870 to 1898.[12]

GROWTH OF COEDUCATION

Coeducational 30·7% 1870 For men only 69·3% ▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□

Coeducational 51·3% 1880 For men only 48·7% ▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□

Coeducational 65·5% 1890 For men only 34·5% ▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□

Coeducational 70·% 1898 For men only 30·% ▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨▨□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□

I have prepared the diagram for 1870 from the U. S. ed. rep. for 1870, pp. 506–516, and the diagram for 1897–98 from the U. S. ed. rep., pp. 1848–1867, and from the table, opposite page 9 of this monograph. The diagrams for 1880 and 1890 are copied from the report for 1889–90, p. 764. For assistance in the preparation of this and other diagrams, and in working out the percentages given here, and elsewhere, in this monograph I am much indebted to Dr. Isabel Maddison.

If Catholic colleges are excluded, as in the map opposite page 10, coeducational colleges formed, in 1898, 80 per cent, and colleges for men only 20 per cent of the whole number—a still more favorable result for coeducation.

All the arguments against the coeducation of the sexes in colleges have been met and answered by experience. It was feared at first that coeducation would lower the standard of scholarship on account of the supposed inferior quality of women’s minds. The unanimous experience in coeducational colleges goes to show that the average standing of women is slightly higher than the average standing of men.[13] Many reasons for the greater success of women are given, such as absence of the distraction of athletic sports, greater diligence, higher moral standards, but the fact, however it may be explained, remains and is as gratifying as astonishing to those interested in women’s education. The question of health has also been finally disposed of; thousands of women have been working side by side with men in coeducational institutions for the past twenty-five years and undergoing exactly the same tests without a larger percentage of withdrawals on account of illness than men. The question of conduct has also been disposed of. None of the difficulties have arisen that were feared from the association of men and women of marriageable age. Looking at coeducation as a whole it is most surprising that it has worked so well.[14] Perhaps the only objection that may be made from men’s point of view to coeducation in America is that it has succeeded only too well and that the proportion of women students is increasing too steadily. Not only is the number of coeducational colleges increasing but the number of women relatively to the number of men is increasing also. In 1890 there were studying in coeducational colleges 16,959 men and 7,929 women; or women, in other words, formed 31.9 per cent of the whole body of students. In 1898 there were 28,823 men and 16,284 women studying in coeducational colleges, women forming 36.1 per cent of the whole body of students. Between 1890 and 1898 men in coeducational colleges have increased 70.0 per cent, but women in coeducational colleges have increased 105.4 per cent.[15]

There is every reason to suppose that this increase of women will continue. Already girls form 56.5 per cent of the pupils in all secondary schools and 13 per cent of the girls enrolled and only 10 per cent of the boys enrolled graduate from the public high schools. It is sometimes said that men students, as a rule, dislike the presence of women, and in especial that they are unwilling to compete for prizes against women for the very reason that the average standing of women is higher than their own. If there is any force in this statement, however, it would seem that men should increase less rapidly in coeducational colleges than in separate colleges for men. The reverse, however, is the case. During the eight years from 1890 to 1898 men have increased in coeducational colleges 70.0 per cent, but in separate colleges for men only 34.7 per cent.[16] This is all the more remarkable, because in the separate colleges for men are included the large undergraduate departments of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania. It is women who have shown a preference for separate education; women have increased more rapidly in separate colleges for women than in coeducational colleges. It will be observed, however, that the separate colleges for women, like the separate colleges for men included in my list of fifty-eight, are in the east; it is in the east only that any preference for separate education is shown by either sex.[17]

Independent colleges for women—Since independent colleges for women of the same grade as those for men are peculiar to the United States, I shall treat them somewhat more fully.[18] The independent colleges here taken into account are the eleven colleges included in division A[19] of the U. S. education reports.[20] The independent colleges for women fall readily into three groups: I. The so-called “four great colleges for women,” Vassar, Smith, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr. It will be seen by referring to the classification on page 12 that these four colleges are included among the fifty-eight leading colleges of the United States; they are all included in the twenty-two colleges admitted to the Association of collegiate alumnæ; two of them, Bryn Mawr and Wellesley, are included in the twenty-three colleges belonging to the Federation of graduate clubs; they are all included in the list of fifty-two leading colleges of the United States given in the handbook of Minerva; they are all, except Bryn Mawr, included in the list given by the U. S. education report for 1897–98[21] of forty-six colleges in the United States having three hundred students and upward; three of them, Bryn Mawr, Smith and Vassar, are included among the fifty-two colleges of the United States possessing invested funds of $500,000 and upward, and two of them, Vassar and Bryn Mawr, are included among the twenty-nine colleges of the United States possessing funds of $1,000,000 and upward; three of them, Smith, Wellesley and Vassar, rank among the twenty-three largest undergraduate colleges in the United States; one of them, Smith, ranks as the tenth undergraduate college in the United States.

=Vassar college, Poughkeepsie, New York=[22]—Founder, Matthew Vassar; intention, “to found and equip an institution which should accomplish for young women what our colleges are accomplishing for young men;” opened, 1865; preparatory department dropped, 1888; presidents, three (men); 45 instructors (16 Ph. D.s.)—35 women, 2 without first degree; 10 men; 584 undergrad. s., 11 grad. s., 24 special s.; productive funds, $1,050,000; a main building with lecture rooms, library and accommodation for 345 students, and two other residence halls accommodating 189 students; a science building; a lecture building; a museum with art, music and laboratory rooms; an observatory; a gymnasium; a plant house; a president’s house; five professors’ houses; total cost of buildings, $1,044,365; vols. in library, 30,000; laboratory equipment, $33,382; acres, 200; music and art depts., but technical work in neither counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence, including washing, $400.

=Wellesley college, Wellesley, Massachusetts=—Founder, Henry F. Durant; intention, “to found a college for the glory of God by the education and culture of women,” opened 1875; preparatory department dropped, 1880; requirement from students of one hour daily domestic or clerical work dropped, 1896; presidents, five (all women); 69 instructors (13 Ph. D.s.)—64 women, 16, apart from laboratory assistants without first degree; 5 men; 611 undergrad. s., 25 grad. s., 21 special s.; productive funds, $7,000;[23] a main building with library lecture rooms and accommodation for 250 students; a chemical laboratory; an observatory; a chapel; an art building; a music building; 8 halls of residence, accommodating 348 students (new hall being built); total cost of buildings, $1,106,500; vols, in library, 49,970; laboratory equipment, $50,000; acres, 410; music and art depts., but technical work in neither counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $175; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students), $400.