The
Graduate
School
HORTON
EDUCATION
LB
2371
182
A 573897
45
夐
​
זזיזיזי
WIN
HANTUI
WIK
!! ::1: זון:
LA
ARTES
MMHAIRU
{ن
1817
LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
VERITAS
HATUM PERUMI KAMISM
TIEBOR
45424
-78
$4
SCIENTIA
BEIJALATALA
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
LIBRARY
A
OF THE
NAM
WSU
BALANINI
FROM THE LIBRARY OF
ARTHUR B. MOEHLMAN
العنا
48411642444-4-|||-MINI:
MAFINUTEMPLA
KIMISLATIEKENLAIME
جور
+
ghgate, JE MOGU
›
THE

GRADUATE SCHOOL
(Its Origin and Administrative Development)
BY
BYRNE J. HORTON, PH.D.
•oseph
New York University
Distributed by
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY BOOKSTORE
18 WASHINGTON PLACE,
NEW YORK, N. Y.

The
Copyright, 1940,
By BYRNE J. HORTON
Printed in the United States of America.
The Press of Robert Joffe.
w
1
T
L
@1-17-41 LS
School B
Give
Why be there is moehl wave
A.
7.
་།
PREFACE
This volume is a constructive piece of research setting
forth the administrative principles and policies of our
American Graduate School as historically developed. It
covers a period of more than half a century beginning
with our oldest Graduate School at Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity and extending to the present time. The factual
basis of this study is carefully documented with references
to historical source material and supplemented with
observations gained from personal visitations by the
author to twenty-two different graduate schools.
As herein developed by Dr. Horton, our American
Graduate School is not conceived as a stereotyped pattern,
but as a flexible organism providing ample opportunities
for a rather wide range of graduate students. This view-
point is in keeping with the development of our entire
system of higher education, both graduate and under-
graduate.
Recent and contemporary criticisms of our graduate
schools in this country are quite often negative in char-
acter and do not attack the constructive problem of
building a better graduate school. The present treatise
addresses itself to that problem and proposes definite
recommendations to that end. The position is taken that
a better graduate school cannot be built until definite
principles and a sound policy for the effective adminis-
tration of graduate work have been agreed upon and
developed. These principles cannot be established a priori,
but must be derived, it is held, from an historical analysis
of the growth of our graduate schools in this country.
While it is true that what we call higher education in
this country is indebted to certain European precedents,
it is also true that these old traditions were greatly
modified to meet problems that were indigenous to our
„
form and structure of government and peculiar to the
social and educational needs of this new and growing
nation.
It is the conviction of the author of this study that one
of the most important instruments for the development
of real graduate work is the Seminar. Dr. Horton in-
sists that for the improvement of graduate work it is
absolutely necessary to improve the work of the seminar.
With this conclusion the present writer is in hearty
agreement.
There is also to be found in this research the summa-
tion of the best thought of the deans of American Grad-
uate Schools. Unquestionably, the readers of this book
will join the author in expressing their obligation and
gratitude to the deans and to all others who have assisted
in making this documentary exposition available. Special
mention should be made of the helpful guidance of Dr.
Daniel C. Knowlton and Dr. Albert B. Meredith of New
York University who were co-sponsors with the present
writer in Dr. Horton's study.
The time and effort expended upon this study have
their own reward in knowing that the future research
worker has available an authentic study and an extensive
bibliography which may lead to more intensive investiga-
tion of the problems of the graduate school.
JOHN O. CREAGER,
Chairman of the Department of College
Administration, New York University.
Preface
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction
II. The Origin, Development, and Meaning of
The University Idea
III. The Origin and Development of Higher
Education in the United States and
Influences Affecting the Same (1636-1876)
IV. The Origin and Development of
Johns Hopkins University
VI. The Official Workshop of the Graduate
School-The Seminar
VII. Administrators of the Graduate Schools
and Their Major Problems
VIII. Summary and Conclusion
Bibliography
Appendix
---
1
1
8
V. The History of the Graduate School and the
Development of Its Administration Since 1880. 73
22
47
115
127.
138
153
168
12
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
TODAY,
ODAY, America must support science and scholarship
more than ever before. It seems that ever since the
World War of 1914-1918, the Old World scholars have
consigned the torch of learning more and more into the
hands of the Western World for safekeeping. America
now has an opportunity of becoming the intellectual
center of the world. Science has no territorial limita-
tions-it is international. We have the opportunity,
the means, and the facilities to foster higher education.
But we cannot continue with this international respon-
sibility unless we know the basis on which our predeces-
sors have established the means of research, which has
for its objective the welfare of humanity.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Society has established an institution which is pri-
marily dedicated to the promotion of science and scholar-
ship so that truth may be discovered. This institution
is the university. President Hutchins of the University
of Chicago stated that "a university is a community of
scholars. It is not a kindergarten; it is not a club; it
is not a reform school; it is not a political party; it is
not an agency of propaganda." A more constructive
statement was made by President Butler of Columbia
University when he said:
A true University is a society of scholars having author-
ity to confer academic degrees and distinctions, by whom
1. Robert M. Hutchins, What Is a University? A Radio Speech,
Delivered April 18, 1935. The National Broadcasting Com-
pany, under the auspices of the National Congress of Parents
and Teachers.
1
students adequately trained through previous study of the
liberal arts and sciences, are led into special fields of learn-
ing and research by teachers of high excellence and origin-
ality; and where by the agency of libraries, museums,
laboratories and publications, knowledge is conserved,
advanced, and disseminated.2
Existing knowledge is tenaciously held and preserved by
the silent teachers of books and other published sources
to be found in the archives of libraries. "The general
principles of any study," writes Cardinal Newman, “you
may learn by books at home; but the detail, the colour,
the tone, the air, the life which makes it live in us, you
must catch all these things from those in whom it lives
already." The one assemblage where all this may be
found is in the true university, which "is a seat of wis-
dom, a light of the world, a minister of the faith, an
Alma Mater of the rising generation."4
The American system of higher education was histori-
cally based on the college concept. Later, these institu-
tions of higher learning placed a capstone on this unit
of organization which has become known as the Graduate
School. Today, the graduate school is the core and
center of university life. An acceptable definition of a
graduate school is given by Laurence Foster in these
words:
A graduate school is an educational institution devoted
to the acquiring, preserving, and disseminating of advanced
knowledge and whose distinguished feature is its emphasis
upon the advancement of knowledge through research, its
evaluation, and application.5
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
In most institutions, graduate work was offered prior
to any systematic efforts to organize a separate graduate
school. Such early attempts to carry on graduate work
2. Nicholas M. Butler, Report of the President of Columbia Uni-
versity for the year ending June 30, 1931. University Reports,
Series 32, No. 38, June 18, 1932, p. 21.
3. John H. Newman, The Idea of a University.
In The Harvard
Classics, edited by Charles W. Eliot. Essays, English and
American. New York, 1910, p. 33.
4. Ibid.
5. Laurence Foster, The Functions of a Graduate School in a
Democratic Society, p. 1.
▸
2
will be recognized throughout this investigation. How-
ever, this study will devote itself essentially to the un-
folding of those experiences which entered into the
organization of the graduate school-the very heart of
the university. The history of these experiences will
be traced from their origin in France and Italy where
they coincide with the beginning of the second half of
the Middle Ages on down to the present day, concluding
with the administrative problems which our present day
administrators face in the discharge of their duties.
DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study limits itself to those institutions which are
members of THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN UNI-
VERSITIES. This association, which is essentially an
association of graduate schools, was formed in 1900 at
a meeting held in Chicago in response to a call signed
by the presidents of five universities: Harvard, Colum-
bia, California, Johns Hopkins, and Chicago. The pri-
mary purpose was the consideration of matters of com-
mon interest relating to graduate study. Within a few
years,
this association, which is recognized in Europe as the official
mouthpiece of university authority in this country, has thus
made it plain that an institution which does not foster its
Graduate School is not to be regarded as fulfilling its mis-
sion as a university in the real meaning of that term.6
No university may secure this recognition on its own
application to the association. It comes only on recogni-
tion and action of the association. "The preliminary to
admission," writes Dean James A. James, the first
Graduate Dean of Northwestern University,
includes a most thorough-going examination on the part of
a committee, appointed by the Association, who appear
without previous notice and proceed to the careful scrutiny
of all the minutes and records pertaining to the Graduate
School; investigation of the qualifications of faculty mem-
bers, in particular, inquiring regarding the contributions
to knowledge they have made in their special fields; and
6. Report of the President, University of Minnesota, 1911-1912.
3
investigation of the general equipment of the instruction
for carrying on graduate instruction.7
This study is further limited to the twenty-eight uni-
versities of the Association of American Universities
which are in the United States of America. The Asso-
ciation consists of thirty-two members. Two of these
are in Canada, namely, the University of Toronto and
McGill University. Likewise, the Institutes of Technology,
the one in California, and the other in Massachusetts,
have not been included in this study. The reason for
this further delimitation is that this study is concerned
with the graduate school as an organized research unit
within the university. From the history of the univer-
sity movement, it will become evident that the graduate
school is concerned only with the faculty of Liberal Arts
and Sciences, or the Faculty of Philosophy.
EMPHASIS UPON ORGANIZATION
This study is essentially concerned with the history
of the organization and the administrative phases of the
graduate school. Organization is positively useless unless
it is realized that function determines the organization
and NEVER does organization determine the function.
In reference to the significance of organization, Doctor
Vernon Kellogg wrote:
Let us not be afraid of organization. It means no real sur-
render of individual freedom or achievement. It only means
that we direct our efforts more intelligently, to more im-
portant undertakings, with more material aid and more
mutual encouragement. Organization lies in the very spirit
of America
No one wants to organize the geniuses;
no one proposes to; no one can. But I am no genius and
most of you are no geniuses. Yet you and I counselling
together, planning together, working together, can do some-
thing steadily to advance scientific knowledge.8
•
This is precisely the position the present writer takes
on the problem of organization. This study, then, will
7. James A. James, A Sketch of the History of the Northwestern
University Graduate School. An unpublished manuscript.
Northwestern University Library, Evanston, Illinois, p. 3.
8. Vernon Kellogg, Isolation or Cooperation in Research. Reprint
and Circular Series of the National Research council, No. 67,
p. 4.
4
not concern itself with a detailed study of the functions
of a graduate school. It would be a most rash conclusion
to say that the present writer is ignoring the most vital
issue. The fact is, this phase of the study was treated
more fully by Laurence Foster in his study of The Foun-
dation of a Graduate School in a Democratic Society.
METHODS AND TECHNIQUE OF PROCEDURE
The present study is the result of a long period of
reading and studying in the libraries. A more direct
attack on the problem was made by going through the
Journals of Proceedings and Addresses of the Associ-
ation of American Universities, and yearbooks of or-
ganizations, and societies devoted to higher education.
Throughout the study, the historical method based upon
investigation of original documents was employed, to
show reliable and authoritative relationships as to the
time of origin and conditions under which administrative
phases of the graduate schools became operative. To
this end, pertinent material was sought in the various
libraries in New York City, such as the New York Uni-
versity libraries, Columbia University libraries, and the
Public Library of New York City. Considerable time
was spent in the Congressional Library in Washington,
D. C., and such other places as the United States Office
of Education, and the American Council on Education.
In general, the material that was scrutinized consisted
of charters of the various institutions, their statutes and
by-laws, the reports of the presidents, bulletins, cata-
logues and such other material as was available under
other titles relating to the institution. One source of
information that was particularly watched, in addition
to those already mentioned was the minutes of the gradu-
ate school administrative committees or the Graduate
Council of the several schools studied. Due to the high
degree of privacy attached to the minutes in some of
the universities, it was not possible to check through more
than the minutes of four institutions. A further source not
E
9
1
5
ها
overlooked, was the vertical file in each library. Here
an occasional pamphlet or unpublished manuscript was
unearthed which gave valuable information toward a
better understanding of the history of the graduate
schools.
Investigating source material is an essential to any
historical study. However, it was felt that the real
spirit behind these documents could be better appreciated
if in addition to this source material, time could be spent
in the very atmosphere where these documents originated.
Hence, as a supplementary measure, approximately six
months were spent in institutional visitations and study.
Upon arrival at an institution, the writer generally
first presented himself to the librarian to obtain permis-
sion to utilize the library facilities. This was generously
granted. Needless to state, a great deal of material was
found in these local libraries which was not accessible
in the universities in New York City nor in the Congres-
sional Library in Washington. In addition to the time
spent in the libraries, the writer seized the opportunity
of conferring with the graduate deans, or some other
?dministrative officer, professors, and students. These
personal contacts supplied the real life and blood which
added colour to the historical documents in the libraries.
The following universities were visited:
Brown University
Catholic University of America
Clark University
Columbia University
Cornell University
Harvard University
Indiana University
Johns Hopkins University
Northwestern University
Ohio State University
Princeton University
State University of Iowa
University of Chicago
University of Illinois
University of Kansas
University of Michigan
University of Minnesota
6
University of Missouri
University of Nebraska
University of Pennsylvania
University of Wisconsin
Yale University
OVERVIEW OF STUDY
Having established the point of European origin, the
ideas that entered into the university concept as they
were developed in Europe up to the time when this uni-
versity idea was started in America form the work of
the following chapter. Then we appraised the conditions
in America from the beginning of Harvard College in
1636, up to the time when the European university idea
was introduced into America by the founding of Johns
Hopkins University. The contributions made to Amer-
ican higher education by the founding of Johns Hopkins
University are recorded in the subsequent chapter. This
is followed by an account of how the idea of a graduate
school spread to other institutions of higher learning,
so that today, we may recognize the College-University
pattern as a truly American system of higher education.
The Graduate School at its best, centers about the seminar
which is its nursery of scientific research. The history
of this scientific nursery in America is unfolded in the
following chapter. This is followed by an account of
the present-day administrators and their major concerns
in the administration of the graduate school. The final
chapter is an attempt to point out some ways in which
we may improve existing conditions so as to make our
graduate schools more intent upon the major objective,
namely, the rendering of significant contributions to
society through genuine research.
7
CHAPTER II
THE ORIGIN, DEVELOPMENT, AND MEANING
OF THE UNIVERSITY IDEA
nar.
(From approximately the middle of the twelfth
century to the middle of the nineteenth century.)
PREVIEW
The central theme of this chapter is to show the devel-
opment of the university idea. From the early Univer-
sitas Magistrorum et Discipulorum, the so-called facultas
artium became known in the sixteenth century as the
philosophical faculty. Research, although at first a
private undertaking, became the center and core of the
universities of Halle, Gottingen, and Berlin. The first
requisite of a university is a scholarly faculty. The
basic principles which are sine qua non requisites of a
university are: Lehrfreiheit, Lernfreiheit, and the Semi-
"The origin of universities is to be sought in France
and Italy; it coincides in time with the beginning of the
second half of the Middle Ages. While in the earlier
half men's eyes were fixed mostly on the past, on Christi-
anity and the ancient world, by the end of the eleventh
century they began rather to look into the future."
9. Friedrich Paulsen, The German Universities, Their Charter
and Historical Development, p. 16.
8
The transition of this intellectual outlook was caused
by several factors among which the capitulary of Charle-
magne, in 782, was of vital importance. In it, Charle-
magne stated:
During recent years we have often received letters from
different monasteries, informing us that at their sacred
services the brethren offered up prayers on our behalf, and
we have observed that the thoughts contained in these
letters, though in themselves most just, were expressed in
uncouth language, and while pious devotion dictated the
sentiments, the unlettered tongue was unable to express
them aright.10
This clearly shows the decadence of the old system
and the dire necessity for a new movement. With succeed-
ing ordinances,11 Charlemagne was influential in bring-
ing greater renown to individual teachers, and paved
the way for the establishment of institutions of higher
learning by imperial edicts. Furthermore, the rise of
free and enterprising cities gave the impetus to the study
of law and medicine. The unrest of the people and
facilities for travel caused by the Crusades educated
the European people to new economic wants, the solu-
tion of which rested to a large degree upon study and
scientific observation. Outstanding scholars became
known and served as the impelling force which brought
students together from various lands. Such universal
gatherings of scholars and students, which eventually
became known as Universitas Magistrorum et Discipulo-
rum,12 were originally established at Salerno, Bologna,
and Paris. "Paris and Bologna," writes Rashdall, “are
the two archetypal-it might almost be said the only
original universities: Paris supplied the model for the
universities of masters, Bologna for the universities of
students."13
10. Patrick J. McCormick, History of Education, p. 95.
11. In 787, Charlemagne urged "diligence in the pursuit of
learning and selection of teachers
who are willing and
zealous to learn themselves and to teach others."
12. James B. Mullinger, History of the University of Cambridge,
p. 70.
13. Hastings Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle
Ages, Vol. II, p. 17.
9
MEDIEVAL UNIVERSITIES
Salerno,14 being a health resort, with a mild climate
and mineral waters, was a logical place for Constantius
Africanus, a native of Carthage, traveler and eminent
physician, to establish a democratic organization for the
study of medicine, very much the same as in other uni-
versities. The University of Salerno never received a
charter but in 1225, was organized as part of the Uni-
versity of Naples.
The organization at Bologna,15 which was a center for
the study of law, followed the lines of the medieval guild;
its purpose being the protection of its members from
injury at the hands of the nearby or surrounding com-
munities. At the outset, no single institutional organiza-
tion was followed. Teachers of greater or lesser renown,
such as Irnerius, lecturer on Roman law and jurispru
dence, and Gratian, the monk, who lectured on and wrote
the Decretum Gratiani, gathered about them an unor-
ganized, unprotected group of boys and young men of
all ages who had a common interest in study. Since this
was "an age when one could scarcely carry one's citizen-
ship beyond one's own city gates,16 the students banded
themselves "together for mutual defense, making citizen-
ship the unit of organization. In these units they voted,
making statutes for their own manner of life and elected
a rector and counselors from their own number."17
However, these teachers controlled the course of study,
promotions, and granted degrees.
The University of Paris18 originated from the Cathedral
School of Notre Dame. This was a Master university,
chartered by the French King in 1180 and by the Pope
of Rome in 1198. Here the teachers had the controlling
power in the corporation. Although the students did not
administer the affairs of the university, they were
14. Ibid., Vol. I, Chapter III.
15. Rashdall, op. cit., Chapter IV.
16. Caro Lynn, A College Professor of the Renaissance, p. 3.
17. Loc. cit.
18. Rashdall, op. cit., Chapter V.
10
organized into "nations" and each "nation" elected its
own councillor. The faculty elected the dean. The deans
and councillors elected a rector who was a representative
of teachers and students.
MEANING OF STUDIUM GENERALE
ET STUDIUM PARTICULARE
"Originally," says the historian Paulsen, "the proper
designation for a university was studium generale. It
was so called because, in contrast to the studium parti-
culare, or school for the town or province, the university
aimed to be a school for the whole of Christendom re-
gardless of national or geographical lines."19 Official
sanction came from royal or pontifical sources. Papal
recognition was sought for two reasons.
The first concerned stability of income; for royal endow-
ment fluctuated with the rise and fall of kings, while a
share of the ecclesiastical tithes afforded a permanent
stipend. The second was the jus ubique docendi. If the
pope granted this privilege to a studium generale, the
'master' of that school had a right to teach anywhere with-
out further examination, while the sovereign could extend
this right only within his own realm.20
In time it became customary "to procure the imperial
sanction as well as papal, for the imperial power also
had something of the glamour of universality about it,
and besides the view had become prevalent that the
Roman law was also the 'imperial' law."21
SPREAD OF UNIVERSITY IDEA. INTO
ENGLAND, SPAIN AND GERMANY
With the migration of students, universities were es-
tablished in other lands. The founding of Oxford was
"probably due to a migration from Paris in 1167."22
To check the wandering students, and to encourage those
19. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 15.
20. Lynn, op. cit., p. 10.
21. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 16.
22. James McKeen Cattell, University Control, p. 3.
11
who could not wander, Professor Lynn quotes Chacon
as saying that shortly after 1200,
King Alfonso VIII of Castile 'sent through all lands for
masters of all arts, and established schools in Palencia, very
good and very rich, and paid substantial salaries to the
lectores, that those who wished to learn need not be dis-
couraged for lack of masters.'
"This," continues Professor Lynn, "was the first definite
attempt to develop in Spain a studium which might com-
pete with those of Paris and Bologna."23
The earliest German speaking "foundations were at
Prague and Vienna, the former established in 1348 by
the House of Luxemburg; the latter in 1365 by the House
of Hapsburg."24 The university movement became so
popular that the ruler of a small territory wanted his
own university. For example, those at Jena, Helmstadt,
Giessen, and others, were founded for political reasons.
Hence, many of these German universities were very poor
and consequently had an entire lack of differentiation of
instruction.25 Only the largest universities could afford
specialization. Many of the Protestant foundations were
so utterly poor that the most incredible combination
of professorial functions was made, as for instance,
the same man teaching mathematics and medicine.26
The first German universities show a twofold division
-after the model of the University of Paris. Teaching
was separated into faculties, and the political corpora-
tion into four "nations;" the former division was con-
cerned with the work of instruction and examination;
the latter with the various matters of jurisdiction and
administration. "The universities of later creation aban-
doned the separation into nations, this division having
been displaced and succeeded by that of faculties."27
The faculties were those of medicine, law, theology, and
the liberal arts.
The universities in the sixteenth century were "want-
23. Lynn, op. cit., p. 3.
24. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 18.
25. Ibid., p. 227.
26. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 229.
27. Ibid., p. 23.
12
ing in the universality of those of the Middle Ages; the
freedom of movement (freizugigkeit) from country to
country, interterritorial, even international, which char-
acterized the older studium generale, existed no longer.
The boundaries of each land, or at least of each creed,
were also the boundaries of the university's field."28
In the main, the old forms of organization and the mode
of instruction have been preserved. The four faculties
likewise remained, with the exception that the facultas
artium was now called the philosophical faculty.29 Fur-
thermore, the baccalareus gradually became extinct, and
the magister was replaced in the higher faculties by the
more dignified title of Doctor-"only the magister artium
maintaining itself down to the present century.”30
TRUTH MUST BE DISCOVERED
A new attitude was now accepted by the universities.
It was generally assumed that truth had already been
established, and that the primary function of instruction
was the mere transmission and clarification of accepted
knowledge. The administrative authorities were con-
cerned with the protection of this knowledge and
guarded it against any false doctrines. The new atti-
tude was that truth must be discovered; that university
administration must be revolutionized because of the
new demands made upon the method of transmitting and
advancing knowledge. The traditional method of the
medieval times persisted, and some traces of the pure
lecture have persisted down to the present time. This
consisted of the professor reading a passage from the
prescribed text with such commentaries as were deemed
necessary. Mathematics consisted of an elucidation of
Euclid; medical instruction was confined essentially to a
commentary on Galen or Hippocrates. However, a barber
might be present who would roughly dissect an animal
28. Ibid., p. 50.
29. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 24.
30. Ibid., p. 51.
13
or, on extremely rare occasions, once or twice a year,
the body of an executed criminal which had been handed
over to the medical school might be dissected. The pur-
pose of the little experimentation they had in those days
was primarily to reaffirm the dogmatic presentations
made rather than to discover new knowledge.31 Galileo
wrote, in 1597, to Kepler that "while he believed in the
Copernican hypotheses, his function as a professor de-
manded of him nothing but to hand down the accepted
opinions of the past."32
RESEARCH AS A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE
Furthermore, in 1671, the Archbishop of Paris as-
sembled the members of the four faculties and addressed
them, saying:
It has come to the ears of the king that views, censured
by the faculty of theology and forbidden by the Parlement,
are spreading not only within the university but elsewhere.
He desires to stop the advance of opinions which might
bring confusion into the explanation of the mysteries of
the church. It is the duty of the professors to look to it
that no doctrine be taught nor allowed to get into the theses
except that admitted in the regulation and statutes of the
university. 33
In general, such were the conditions down to the seven-
teenth century. The universities were not places of
original research. Experimentation was carried on, but
these early laboratories were to be found in the bedroom
or kitchen of the experimentors, e. g., Newton's optical
researches were made in his home; young James Watt's
first experimental observation of the tea kettle was made
in his humble home; while Robert Boyle tested his laws
of elasticity of gases in tubes along the stairs.34 Such
31. Theodore Puschman, A History of Medical Education from the
Most Remote to the Most Recent Times, p. 321 ff.
32. Quoted in The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seventeenth
Century, by Martha Ornstein, p. 218.
33. Charles M. Jourdain, Histoire de l'Universite de Paris au
17e et au 18e siecle. Paris, 1862-66, p. 235. (Bold type by
present writer.)
34. Florian Cajori, A History of Physics in Its Elementary
Branches, Including the Evolution of Physical Laboratories,
p. 288.
1
14
men soon banded themselves together into what later
became known as the "learned societies." The beginnings
of the Royal Society of London was the result of such
informal meetings of men who were more or less in-
terested in experimental knowledge. This was clearly
set forth in the following letter from Doctor Wallis's
"Account of Some Passages of His Own Life." He wrote:
About the year 1645 while I lived in London (at a time
when by our civil wars academical studies were much in-
terrupted in both our Universities)
I had the oppor-
tunity of being acquainted with diverse worthy persons,
inquisitive into natural philosophy and other parts of human
learning, and particularly of what has been called New
Philosophy or Experimental Philosophy. We did by agree-
ment, diverse of us, meet weekly in London on a certain
day, to treat and discourse of such affairs . . . These meet-
ings were held some times at Dr. Goddard's lodging in
Wood Street
on occasion of his keeping an operator
in his house, at a convenient place in Cheapside and some-
times at Gresham College or some place near adjoining.35
Because there was too much dogmatism, formalism,
discipline, routine, and control in the universities of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, scientific men found
greater freedom and stimulus in these learned societies,
or academies of science, which though under the patron-
age of the court, remained pre-eminently informal or-
ganizations. Not only were these men of science con-
nected with the academies of science, which were then
established, but many were also associated with the newly
founded museums, observatories, and botanical gardens.
"This movement," observes Professor Cattell, "is an-
alogous to the contemporary establishment of research
institutions outside the universities."36
•
After the middle of the seventeenth century the sover-
eign power of Germany "developed into a kind of gov-
ernmental province embracing all the purposes of civili-
zation and welfare. During the eighteenth century, this
conception became absolutely dominant" and the sovereign,
35. Quoted in A History of the Royal Society with Memoirs of
the Presidents, compiled from authentic documents, by C. R.
Weld, p. 30.
36. Cattell, op. cit., pp 5-6.
•
15
"as the father of his people, was also the head tutor of
his subjects."37 Princes were then eager to surround
themselves with men of learning. This called for the
establishment of a new type of university.
UNTRAMMELLED FREEDOM IN UNIVERSITIES
OF HALLE, LEIPSIC AND GOTTINGEN
To Halle belongs the glory of being the first really
modern university, 'for it was here that the libertas
philosophandi on which the modern university rests, the
principle of untrammelled investigation and untram-
melled teaching, first took root."38 Three outstanding
leaders of the University of Halle, who laid the founda-
tion for the basic principles of the new type of university
work, were: A. H. Francke, the theologian and foremost
representative of pietism; Christian Thomasius, the
jurist, university critic noted for his defiance of Latin;
and the philosopher, Christian Wolff.
When Christian Thomasius was professor at the Uni-
versity of Leipsic, he broke away from all precedent in
1678, and lectured in the German language. In his
Vernunftlehre or Reasonable Instruction, he declared:
"Worldly wisdom is so easy a matter, that it can be un-
derstood by all people; Greek philosophers did not write
in Hebrew but in their mother tongue." Likewise, in
his first lecture in Halle, he declared in German: "We
are not bound to Aristotle, we shall not be accused of
lese majeste even if we make fun of the king of philoso-
phers, and philosophers of kings," thereby insisting on
the principle of untrammelled teaching.
Christian Wolff taught at Halle from 1707 to 1723
where he was expelled because of his philosophical teach-
ings by Frederick William I, but was honorably restored
in 1740 by Frederick the Great. Paulsen says that "this
honorable restoration . . . marks the great change that
had come about. The general acceptance of his philo-
37. Frank Thilly and William W. Elang, The German Univer-
sities and University Study, p. 72.
38. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 61.
16
sophical system really implied the end of scholastic philo-
sophy in German universities; and in its place modern
philosophy, under the guise of Wolff's system, assumed
control of university instruction."39
"During the latter half of the eighteenth century,'
says Professor Paulsen, "there grew up a rival of Halle
which afterwards surpassed her-the University of
Göttingen,"40 which was founded in 1737, in Hanover,
by George II. Because of the eminence of the learned
professors of this university, counts and barons of the
Holy Roman Empire were attracted to and became
students in the University. Likewise, English and
American students flocked to this University. In fact,
Göttingen became the "fashionable university."41 As
time went on, the study of philosophy surpassed the
glory of "the queen of all studies-theology." Due to
political disturbances, however, in which both professors.
and students participated, the attendance declined and
with the subsequent expulsion, in 1837, of Die Göttinger
Sieben (the famous seven professors), for protesting
against the King's revocation of their liberal constitution,
the prosperity of the University of Gottingen was still
further reduced.
"9
THE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN
Two significant advances in university development may
be observed in the nineteenth century, namely, the extra-
ordinary increase in governmental activity and expendi-
tures on behalf of the universities; and their enhanced
internal independence and freedom. Of the several im-
39. Paulsen, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 59.
40. Thilly and Elang give an account of the following eminent
professors who made Göttingen famous. They are: Schloezer
and Peutter in politics and law; Mosheim taught history;
Michaels, oriental languages; Albrecht von Haller and Blumen-
bach, taught physical anthropology; Tobias Mayer, the
astronomer; Leichtenberg, the physicist; Kastner, the mathe-
matician; and J. M. Gessner and J. G. Heyne, who introduced
the new science of classical philology and who influenced
many American students by their seminar methods.
41. Thilly-Elang, op. cit., p. 47.
G
·
17
portant universities that were established in this century,
the University of Berlin takes the lead.
Immediately after the peace of Tilsit (1807) when
Prussia had been reduced to the level of a third-rate
Power, the University of Berlin was founded in 1809.
The cause for its establishment and its liberal endow-
ment at a time when the country was well impoverished
is stated by the German monarch himself. He said:
"The State must replace by intellectual forces the physical
forces which it has lost."42
Schleiermacher in his Gelegentliche Gedanken uber
Universitäten in deutschen Sinne, points out the intel-
lectual character of the University of Berlin. He writes
that the founding of the University demonstrates
that Prussia instead of surrendering the function it had so
long practiced, that of striving above all else for a higher
intellectual culture as the source of its power, proposed
to begin anew; that Prussia-and this is doubtess equally
important-would not allow itself to be isolated, but de-
sired, rather in this respect also, to remain in living union
with the whole of natural Germany.43
Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) at the head of
the University of Berlin stood for respect for science
and its vital principle of freedom. Reporting to King
Friedrich William III, concerning the establishment of
the University, Herr von Humboldt expressed the wish
that "this institution shall be throughout something quite
distinct from the existing Agricultural Universities, and
hence that from its infancy its entire pattern of organiza-
tion be directed accordingly with the hope that the num-
ber of students will become significant. This wish has
happily fulfilled itself beyond expectation."44 True
enough, once the University was brought into being by the
State, it should be supported by the State, but the State
should never meddle
meddle with the University's internal
42. Quoted in Paul Monroe, A Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. V,
p. 662.
43. Frederick E. Schleiermacher, Gelegentliche Gedanken uber
Universitäten in deutschen Sinne, p. 145. (Bold type by present
writer.)
44. Adolph Wagner, Die Entwicklung der Universität Berlin,
1810-1896, p. 18.
18
affairs. Hence, Herr von Humboldt conceived the Uni-
versity not only as an institution for the highest scholarly
and scientific instruction, but at the same time to be a
center for research and investigation. Consequently,
the Professor was no longer a mere teacher but also a
scholar and investigator. His function was now two-
fold, namely, he must instruct and at the same time
advance his particular branch of specialization or science.
These were the ideas of von Humboldt which entered
into the new institution of higher learning.
The organization as outlined by Herr von Humboldt
was perpetuated in a large measure and is relatively
simple. The reigning sovereign, or the royal prince in
other lands, is the Rektor, or nominal head. The actual
administrative functions are carried out by the Prorektor
who is selected from among the professors for a period
of one year. The Kurator is the connecting link between
the university and the State, especially in reference to
financial control. The Academic Senate is composed of
delegates selected from the full professors, the Rektor
being its chairman. The Judge of the University and
the Deans also have seats in the Senate, and form a
general executive committee.45 The faculty is all-import-
ant. The professors are divided into Ordentliche (full
professors) and Ausserordentliche (extraordinary profes-
sors). There are also Honorarprofessoren and Titelpro-
fessoren, who give occasional lectures. The Ordentliche
professors form the Fakultat, at the head of which is
the Dekan or Dean whose office rotates like that of the
Rektor. Since the Ordentliche professors form the
faculty, they, and they alone, are responsible for the
examining of the candidates for degrees.
The instructors in the lower ranks are the Privatdocent
and the Lektoren. The former is a private lecturer who
is granted permission to lecture (venia legendi) by
presenting to the university authorities evidence of his
45. Foster Watson, The Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Educa-
tion, Vol. II, p. 704.
19
ability and scholarship. He receives no regular salary
but is entitled to a remuneration in proportion to the
number who attend his lectures. The Privatdocent is
most eager to gain a reputation, because it is from these
ranks that the promotions to the regular faculty are
made. The Lektoren are salaried lecturers who come
from foreign lands generally to teach modern languages.
There are two types of students, namely, those who
have been admitted as full fledged university students
known as Arbiturienten and those to whom permission is
granted to attend lectures, but have no academic standing.
The latter are not particularly encouraged, and their study
leads nowhere. These students are known as Hospitanten
or guests.
The matriculated student enjoys complete Lernfreiheit,
that is to say, he may attend whatever courses he likes,
attend as irregularly as he likes, and no questions are
asked. The university course is wholly untrammelled
by examinations until its close. In addition to the regular
lectures, practical class work is a very important feature
of the German method of teaching. This is known as
The Seminar. This is "for the student of humanistic
learning what the laboratory is for the scientist; and it
is in the Seminar that the most important work of the
German university is carried out."46 In fact, the seminars
are "the real nurseries of research," which originated in
the faculty of philosophy, and it is from them that the
dissertation was evolved.47 "The faculty of philosophy
is throughout directed toward the production of scholars.
The professor of philology, of history, of mathematics,
of physics, proceeds entirely upon the assumption that
he has before him, in his lectures and exercises, exclusively
future scholars and professors."48 Hence the faculty of
philosophy is really the learned faculty.
46. See Chapter VI, "The Seminar.”
47. Paulsen, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 80.
48. Ibid., p. 81.
20
The German universities of the last century have em-
phasized and contributed three basic principles, namely,
the principle of Lehrfreiheit; the principle of Lernfrei-
heit; and the principle and institution of the Seminar.
These basic principles with the new character of the
university professor-that he is at once the teacher and
the research worker-influenced to a large extent the
development of the university idea in America.
*
I
21
CHAPTER III
THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF HIGHER
EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND
INFLUENCES AFFECTING THE SAME.
(1636-1876)
*
*
PREVIEW
*
Aristocratic educational institutions of England were
transplanted to a democratic setting in New England.
These early institutions of higher learning, known as
colleges, spread rapidly to other sections of the country.
French influences aided the cause of democratic collegiate
organization in New York and in Virginia. With Amer-
ican scholars being attracted to European universities,
especially to the German universities, and with a demand
for scientific training, American educational leaders
pleaded that our students be given an opportunity for
advanced study and research in this country. Due to a
number of factors operating in this country, such as,
agricultural interests, increased demand for scientific
training in business, the growth of professional schools,
a changing philosophy, and the influence of outstanding
educational leaders, a general interest for the improve-
ment of social, economic, and educational conditions arose
throughout the country. Hence, a new type of an Amer-
ican institution of higher learning was needed.
*
*
*
1
22
ENGLISH INFLUENCE
After wee had builded our houses, provided necessaries
for our livelihood, reared conveninet places of God's wor-
ship, and settled the Civil Government, one of the next
things wee longed for and looked after was to advance
Learning and to perpetuate it to Posterity; dreading to
leave an illiterate ministry to the Churches, when our
present Ministers shall lie in the Dust. And as wee were
thinking and consulting how to effect this great Work, it
pleased God to stir up the Heart of one Mr. Harvard (a
godly gentleman and a lover of Learning, there living
amongst us) to give the one-half of his estate (it being
in all about £1,700) towards the erection of a Colledge, and
all his library. After him another gave £300; others after
him cast in more, and the publique hand of the State added
the rest. (New England's First Fruits.)
With the foregoing account, the history of higher edu-
cation in the United States takes its start. The first
institution of higher learning was incorporated in 1650,
under the title of "The President and Fellows of Harvard
College," and has continued to operate under the same
title down to the present day, with the exception that
since 1864, the name "University" replaced the former
title of "College," in the official catalogue of the institu-
tion. Other important institutions of higher learning
soon appeared. Chief among these were the following:
William and Mary founded in 1693; Yale, in 1701,
and Princeton in 1746; while in the latter half of the
eighteenth century, Columbia, then known as King's
College, made its appearance in 1754.
These early centers of higher education were "colleges"
in the loose sense of the word. Their curriculum was
hardly advanced beyond the present day high school,
though their culture was more general, catering to the
professional training of the ministry. They were resi-
dential and teaching bodies patterned after the aristo-
cratic institutions of Cambridge and Oxford. From its
foundation, however, Harvard assumed the power of
conferring degrees without authority, having assumed
such power by tacit acquiescence of the colony. "In so
doing," said the former President Lowell of this institu-
tion, "it has usurped a royal prerogative, yet its right
was not contested in England, and Dunster, the first
S
C
23
1
!
President, obtained from the two great English univer-
sities recognition of its degrees as equivalent to their
own, a privilege that seems to have been dropped only
when they ceased to give the same treatment to foreign
degrees. This modified type of the English college,"
continued the same writer, "with a power to grant
degrees and therefore to determine its own standards,
was universally followed until the Revolution, and be-
came the traditional form of the American college."49
FRENCH INFLUENCE
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE
STATE OF NEW YORK
1
The origin of the University of the State of New York,
which dated from 1784, "was the work of no one man,
of no one tendency." This was the conclusion of Profes-
sor Sherwood after a detailed study of the original docu-
ments which contained the debates, reports, and early
laws of the University of the State of New York. A
summary statement of the various influences affecting
the development of the educational system in the State
of New York was presented by Doctor Sherwood in the
following words:
The whole of the colonial history of New York is a
history of the growth of ideas and institutions which led
to the establishment of the university. The Dutch brought
the idea of free public schools for elementary teaching, but
it was the idea of joint clerical and civil control. The high-
er learning was fostered after the English gained control.
The French Huguenot refugees brought a spirit which
readily united with the democratic elements among the
Dutch and English. By the beginning of the eighteenth
century the secular spirit was already opposing the spirit
of the propagandist society, and the seeds of revolution
were scattered throughout the colony by the English revo-
lution and the writings of John Locke
Already the
political and educational revolutions were begun at the
same time the psychology and political philosophy of Locke
were awakening the voices of the same twofold revolution
in France, and the French philosophers flooded the world
49. A. Lawrence Lowell, At War with Academic Traditions in
America, p. 212.
24
with the doctrine of the new civil education. While France
was debating, New York was acting.50
Franklin was one of the great Americans who labored
for an educational system in New York. His thoughts
were influenced to a large extent by his close friend
John Jay who advised Franklin from France concerning
the education of American youth in America. In 1784,
John Jay returned from Paris to New York and took a
conspicuous part in the reorganization of the University
in 1787. Professor Sherwood observed that "the French
ideas of secular education, of State control, of central-
ized administration, New York seized firmly. But, trained
in English law, the New York leaders did not care so
much for symmetry and ideal completeness as for an
organization which would conserve what was good in the
past and would expand to meet the needs of the future."51
Hence, concluded the same writer, the University of the
State of New York "was neither English nor French.
It was the American University, and as such its idea
has largely given the impetus to the development of State
educational systems."52
INCREASED FRENCH INFLUENCE
In the late days of the American Revolution, the first
constitution of Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Ver-
mont provided for institutions of higher learning. The
University of Georgia was organized in 1785 and the
University of Tennessee in 1794. The Revolutionary
War not only broke the political bonds by which America
was connected with its mother country, but it also severed
educational ties and traditions. American educators now
turned from their English enemies to their French
friends.
According to Compayre, the French theory of educa-
50. Sidney Sherwood, The University of the State of New York:
History of Higher Education in the State of New York, p. 99.
(Bold type by present writer.)
51. Sherwood, op. cit.
52. Ibid.
25
tion, which dominated thinking during the eighteenth
century, is marked by four characteristics; namely, its
spirit is nationalistic, equalitarian, and secular, and is
based upon philosophical grounds.53 In France, "the
constructive genius of the Encyclopedists was supplement-
ed and actualized by the practical genius of Napoleon."54
In 1808, the universite imperiale was established which
was an independent administrative body into which all
schools, including all the colleges and schools of the
country above the elementary were incorporated. "This
was the idea which Jefferson had in mind for the
University in Virginia but was not able to carry out
in its entirety."55
•
1
THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA
In a letter to Thomas Cooper, dated August 25, 1814,
Thomas Jefferson refers to his idea of a university,
namely, that it be a place in which "all the sciences use-
ful to us and at this day, be taught in their highest
degree."56 Accordingly, Jefferson was "the first Amer-
ican to establish a university 'instituted for the inter-
preting of nature and the producing of great and marvel-
ous works, for the benefit of men.' "57 From the first
opening for the reception of students on March 7, 1825,
down to 1904, the University of Virginia had no president.
The affairs of the institution were conducted under a
plan adopted by the Board of Visitors on October 4, 1824.
The plan was as follows: "At a meeting of the faculty
53. Gabriel Compayre, Histoire critique des doctrines de l'edu-
cation en France depuis le seizieme siecle. Paris, 1879,
Vol. II, Chapter I.
54. Edwin E. Slosson, The American Spirit in Education, p. 170.
55. Ibid. (In "Notes on History of Foreign Influence upon
Education in the United States," Professor Hinsdale refers
to "Mr. Jefferson as a Propagandist of French Science, Arts,
and Educational Ideals." See Report of United States Com-
missioner of Education, 1897-98, Vol. I, p. 598.)
56. H. A. Washington, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol.
VI, p. 371.
57. William Rawley, writing on Bacon's "Table" of Solomon's
House in The New Atlantis.
26
of professors, on matters within their functions, one of
them shall preside, by rotation, for a term of one year
each." Professor Arrowood observed: "It must not be
forgotten that the first Rector discharged many of the
duties of a modern university president."58 Jefferson
held firmly to the opinion "that instruction should be
freed from ecclesiastical control; he advocated universal
education, gratuitous at the primary level; and he sought
to find a basis for his doctrines in philosophy."59
ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Further French influence may be observed from a study
of the founding of the University of Michigan which has
been called the "mother of the State Universities."60
Professor Hinsdale of the University of Michigan
stated: "No doubt the (early plan of organization) was
suggested by the University of France."61 Slosson does
not use the term "suggested" but stated that "in 1817,
the Acting Governor and two Supreme Court Judges
authorized the establishment of a system of education
modeled after Napoleon's University of France."62
Judge Woodward drew up the plan for it and invented
the nomenclature. The "Act to establish the Catholepis-
temiad, or University, of Michigan" was enacted in
1817. The first part of the act reads:
Be it enacted by the Governor and the Judges of the
Territory of Michigan, That there shall be in the said
Territory a Catholepistemiad, or University of Michigan.
The Catholepistemiad, or University of Michigan shall be
composed of thirteen didaxiim or professorships
More
than one didaxia or professorship may be conferred upon
the same person . .
.63
In 1821, "the governor and judges translated Judge
58. Charles F. Arrowood, Thomas Jefferson and Education in a
Republic, p. 45.
59. Ibid., p. 49.
60. Slosson, op. cit., p. 169.
61. B. A. Hinsdale, Notes on the History of Foreign Influence
upon Education in the United States, in Report of the Com-
missioner of Education for the Year 1897-98, Vol. I, Part I,
p. 600. (Italics by the present writer.)
62. Slosson, op. cit., p. 601.
63. Hinsdale, op. cit., p. 601.
.
J
•
27
Woodward's charter into modern forms of speech and
modified it in some particulars,"64 but the institution
seemed "to lapse into a college of the conventional type."65
At least, it did for a time.
GERMAN INFLUENCE
PRESIDENT TAPPAN'S INFLUENCE
During the next few decades, the American colleges
seemed to have entered into a period of intellectual somno-
lence. American scholars were attracted to German
universities66 only to return to this country and sing
the praises of the
of the German Strengwissenschaftliche
Methode. One of these enthusiasts was Henry P. Tappan,
the first President of the University of Michigan.67
At once, President Tappan set himself to the task of
transforming the University of Michigan into "a univer-
sity worthy of the name with a capacity commensurate
with the growth of all things around us, doing a work
which shall be heartily acknowledged by the present
generation, and reaching with increasing power through
the generation to come."68 The first catalogue was issued
during his administration, and Professor Hinsdale ob-
served that it "well represents his lofty ideal." In it we
read:
The Regents and Faculty cannot forget that a system of
public instruction can never be complete without the highest
form of education, any more than without that primary
education which is the natural and necessary introduction
to the whole. The undergraduate course, after all that can
be done to perfect it, is still limited to a certain term of
years, and, necessarily, embraces only a limited range of
studies. After this must come professional studies, and
those more extended studies in science, literature and the
arts, which alone can lead to profound and finished scholar-
ship. A system of education on the Prussian principles of
64. President James B. Angell, "The Semicentennial Celebration
of the Organization of the University of Michigan," An
Address, 1887.
65. Slosson, op. cit., p. 172.
66. Charles F. Thwing, History of Education in America, p. 320.
See also Hinsdale, op. cit., pp. 591-629.
67. Slosson, op. cit., p. 176.
68. Burke A. Hinsdale, History of the University of Michigan,
p. 43.
28
education cannot discard that which forms the culmination
of the whole. An institution cannot deserve the name of
a university which does not aim, in all the material of
learning, in the Professorships which it establishes, and in
the whole scope of its provisions, to make it possible for
every student to study what he pleases and to any extent
he pleases. Nor can it be regarded as consistent with the
spirit of a free country to deny to its citizen the possibilities
of the highest' knowledge.69
President Tappan then proposed a plan "in accordance
with the educational systems of Germany and France
(which) will form the proper development of the Uni-
versity." 9970 But his "proposed reforms," says Slosson,
"were too ambitious for complete accomplishment. He
did introduce letters and research work and extended
the elective system which had been started at Michigan
in 1837."71 The cause of President Tappan's inability
to execute his "lofty ideals" is due to the fact that the
American people, although perfectly willing to accept
workable ideas of any foreign land, are at the same time
opposed to anyone who, through his own enthusiasm,
imposes European ideas and practices upon the American
people or their institutions. Dictatorial practices are
not in harmony with democratic principles. This was
precisely the difficulty of President Tappan, who is
referred to as a "somewhat autocratic one."72 An early
History of the University of Michigan revealed the op-
position and ridicule which President Tappan incurred
on account of his persistent advocacy of the German ideal.
In it we read:
So much was this foreign school system the burden of
(Tappan's) discourse that it brought a storm of censure
and abuse from some of the journals of the state, whose
editors were alarmed for the glory of the American eagle,
or, possibly, were glad of the theme so potent to arouse the
stout patriotism of their American hearts. Of all the
imitations of English aristocracy, German mysticism, Prus-
sian imperiousness, and Parisian nonsensities, he is al-
together the most un-Americanized, the most completely
foreignized specimen of an abnormal Yankee we have ever
seen.73
69. Loc. cit.
70. Loc. cit.
71. Slosson, op. cit., pp. 177-178.
72. Ibid., p. 176.
73. Elizabeth M. Farrand, History of the University of Michigan,
p. 112.
29
FACTORS CAUSING GENERAL
EDUCATIONAL INTEREST
In justification to President Tappan it should be ob-
served that his enthusiasm was absolutely necessary to
pave the way for further progress in higher education.
At about the same time, a number of other factors caused
a general interest throughout the country in the develop-
ment of higher education and the improvement of social
and economic conditions. Among these may be listed
first, the rise of agricultural interests in the country;
second, the demand for specialized knowledge in business
and in the professions; third, the rise of professional
schools; fourth, a changing philosophy; and fifth, the
appearance of a remarkable group of educational leaders.
These and many other cross currents operated in the
country creating a demand for a newer type of educa-
tion causing American scholars to seek the best the
human mind was able to offer for making constant im-
provement in human endeavour.
AGRICULTURAL INTERESTS
Towards the end of the eighteenth century, popular
interest in agriculture arose. Essays and books appeared,
agricultural papers came into prominence, and the pro-
fession of farming commenced to have a literature.
Agricultural societies in many sections of the country
were formed and these voluntary organizations agitated
for agricultural schools. Maine opened such a school as
early as 1821, and Connecticut opened another in 1824.
With the development of the West and with the increase
of slave power in the South, interest in agriculture was
transformed to new sections of the country. In these
early days, college education was thought of as being
primarily the business of the church and hence a private
enterprise. But soon it occurred to farsighted men, es-
pecially in Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, and
Michigan, that this new and expensive form of education,
if it was to succeed, would need to be supported by public
:
30/
endowment. For example, the farsighted members who
were drafting the new Michigan State constitution in
1850 made it obligatory upon the State to establish and
maintain a college or school of agriculture either in con-
nection with the State university or separated from it.
Hence, in 1857, the Michigan Agricultural College was
opened as a state institution. In other places, the in-
terest in agricultural education became associated with
the movement for education in mechanical arts.
About this time, however, another movement arose.
It developed in Illinois and was headed by Professor
Jonathan B. Turner of Illinois College. Although Pro-
fessor Turner was an instructor in Latin and Greek, he
was at the same time interested in agricultural experi-
ments. He popularized the Osage orange for farm hedges
and invented various implements for planting and cul-
tivating crops. On May 13, 1850, he presented to a county
institute of teachers at Griggsville, a plan for a state
university for industrial classes in each of the States
of the Union. This plan was again presented on Novem-
ber 18, 1851, to a convention of farmers meeting in
Gransville, Illinois. The plan was approved by the con-
vention and a resolution was adopted to "take immediate
steps for the establishment of a university in the State
of Illinois." This resolution and Professor Turner's
plan were printed and circulated far and wide.74 Other
meetings were held, and at the meeting held at Spring-
field, January 4, 1853, a petition was drawn up request-
ing the Illinois legislature to petition Congress to appro-
priate lands to each state for the establishment of in-
dustrial universities. A request to this effect was made
by the Illinois legislature in 1853 and was probably the
first petition of such a nature ever made by any state.75
For several years Professor Turner was interested in
organizing the Industrial League which was committed
74. A Plan for an Industrial University, United States Patent
Office Report, 1852.
75. Journal of the House of Representatives, State of Illinois, 1853.
<
31
to propagandizing and popularizing the importance of
agricultural and industrial education.
Likewise in 1853, a meeting of the State Agricultural
Society was held at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and meas-
ures were taken for the establishment of Farmers'
Agricultural School. So successful was this school that
in 1857 the legislature voted $50,000 to it on condition
that a like sum be obtained from other sources. This
was accomplished by 1859 and two years later the legis-
lature changed the name to the Agricultural College of
Pennsylvania. Similar events occurred in other states.
In 1856, the United States Congress ordered an inves-
tigation of existing conditions in agriculture and in 1857
Mr. Justin Morrill, a representative from the State of
Vermont, introduced a bill "donating public lands to the
several States and Territories which may provide colleges
for the benefit of agricultural and mechanic arts."76
The bill, though vetoed by President Buchanan, was
reintroduced in Congress in 1862 with slight modifica-
tions and immediately signed by President Lincoln. The
far-reaching educational effect of the Morrill Act of
1862 is not likely to be over-estimated. Professor Cub-
berley gives the following account:
Probably no aid for education given by the National
Government to the States has proved so fruitful as have
these grants of land, and subsequently of money, for in-
struction in agriculture and the mechanic arts. New and
vigorous colleges have been created (Cornell, Purdue, and
the state universities of Ohio and Illinois are examples);
small and feeble state universities have been awakened
into new life (Vermont and Wisconsin for examples); agri-
culture and engineering have been developed as new learned
professions; and the States have been stimulated to make
larger and rapidly increasing appropriations for their uni-
versities, until today the state universities largely over-
shadow all but the best endowed of the old denominational
colleges.77
76. Congressional Globe, 35 Congress, 1 Session, p. 32.
77. Ellwood P. Cubberley, Public Education in the United States,
pp. 280-1.
32
DEMAND FOR SCIENTIFIC TRAINING
Since 1791, when the United States Patent Office issued
the first patent, the progress of industries in the United
States gave rise to an unrivaled activity in invention
and labor-saving devices which in turn gave rise to a
demand for an education which would be more closely
articulated with the needs of the day. President Fred-
erick Barnard of Columbia pointed out the effect of this
phase of social progress in the following words:
and
With the rapid progress of scientific discovery
the multiplication at the same time of useful applications
of science to the arts of industry, there arose a demand for
a species of special scientific culture which could only be
supplied by the universities and technological schools of
France and Germany.78
At about this time, Daniel Coit Gilman of Yale Uni-
versity was engaged in a study of the character of the
instruction given in the scientific schools in America
as well as in Europe. The American scientific schools,
apart from colleges and universities, were carrying on
scientific investigation and research. Professor Cubber-
ley stated that "as our college development dates from
Harvard, so does our technical instruction in reality date
from Rensselaer."79 The first American school of science
and civil engineering, known as the Rensselaer Poly-
technic Institute, named after its founder, Stephen Van
Rensselaer, was established in Troy, New York, in 1824.
In founding this institution, Mr. Van Rensselaer said:
•
My principal object is to qualify teachers for instructing
the sons and daughters of farmers and mechanics, by lectures
or otherwise, in the application of experimental chemistry,
philosophy, and natural history of agriculture,. domestic
economy, the arts, and manufacturers . I am inclined
to believe that competent instructors may be produced in
the school at Troy, who will be highly useful to the com-
munity in the diffusion of a very useful kind of knowledge,
with its application to the business of living.80
•
78. Frederick A. P. Barnard, Report of the President for 1878-79.
Quoted in The Rise of a University, edited by William F.
Russell, p. 344.
79. Cubberley, op. cit., p. 277.
80. Palmer C. Ricketts, History of the Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute, p. 6.
33
In 1853, Daniel Coit Gilman went to Europe as attaché
to the Russian legation, and returned to America in 1856
with his mind broadened and enriched by travel and
study, having spent many months at St. Petersburg,
Paris, and Berlin.81 Reviewing his European experi-
ences, Mr. Gilman observed that
Prussia, Austria, and the lesser powers of Germany
unite in testifying that the agricultural and manufacturing
prosperity of those countries, other things being equal, has
been in direct proportion to the efficiency of their schools
of special training .. Great Britain was losing its relative
position; and instead of remaining superior in manufacturing
skill to all nations upon the continent, was in danger of
becoming inferior to many.
•
Referring to the Exhibitions of Industry and Art, at the
World's Fair, held at the Crystal Palace, London, in
1851, as well as those held in New York and Paris, Mr.
Gilman wrote:
Upon these occasions, opportunities of a favorable char-
acter have been afforded for the comparison of the in-
dustrial attainment of different lands; and, although in
London and Paris, our own countrymen did not avail them-
selves to the full extent of the advantages of such an
exhibition, yet, any one who was acquainted with the
character of American manufactures, needs only a glance
at the displays which were made by the European nations,
to be convinced that, notwithstanding the number of in-
genious inventions which have originated in this country,
the productions of our shops and factories are, except for
a few cheap staple goods, inferior to what are made at a
corresponding cost abroad. There are many branches of
useful manufacturing in which, as yet, we have scarcely
made a commencement.82
Mr. Gilman then paused and rhetorically asked: "Why
are students rushing abroad?" To which he replied:
"We must give them an opportunity here." His report
concluded with these words of admonition:
With the greatest wisdom, the Fathers of New England,
in the earliest days of their colonial existence, commenced
not merely the school for elementary instruction, but the
grammar school, and the college, in which more elevated
departments of knowledge might thoroughly be taught.
In those branches of science which have been discovered
81. Homer B. Sprague, (Editor of the Yale Literary Magazine).
"Daniel Coit Gilman," Fasciculus III, p. 2.
82. Daniel C. Gilman, Scientific Schools in Europe, Considered
in Reference to Their Prevalence, Utility, Scope and Desir-
ability in America. In Henry Barnard's Journal of Educa-
tion (March, 1856), p. 326.
34
The
since their day, we need to follow their example.
rudiments of science are already taught in various institu-
tions and experimental knowledge is attained in the shop
and the field. But, more than this is needed. We need
higher courses of instruction, which alone, will secure our
continued advancement, or even our permanent prosperity.83
THE PERIOD OF GROWTH OF
PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS
As society provided schools for the improvement of
agriculture and offered scientific training, a number of
professional schools arose either in connection with an
established university or as independent schools.
The
medical profession established its first professional
school in Pennsylvania as early as 1765; King's College
followed two years later. Harvard offered medical
instruction in 1782, Dartmouth in 1798 and Yale in 1813.
In the field of law, professional training was first of-
fered by the faculty of law in the University of Mary-
land in 1812, Harvard in 1817, Yale in 1824, and Columbia
in 1854. The first college of dentistry was opened in
Baltimore in 1839, and the second at Cincinnati in 1845.
The first college of pharmacy was opened at Philadel-
phia in 1822. These and other professional schools began
to turn out men who soon proved the superiority of pro-
fessional training over mere experience.
CHANGE FROM TRANSCENDENTAL
IDEALISM TO PRAGMATISM
▾
The German idealism of the eighteenth century rested
upon basic assumptions not susceptible to proof. It
cherished truths that were intuitive rather than experi-
mental, subjective rather than objective, it placed a
higher premium upon the deductive than upon the in-
ductive method. The transcendentalist's universe was
fixed, not growing; his philosophy was constant, not
dynamic; it was a world in which truths were self-
evident and laws were immutable. Such a philosophy
83. Ibid., p. 327.
35
►◄
was obviously irrelevant to the kind of a universe which
Charles Darwin discovered. His Origin of Species was
published in 1859 and the theories of organic evolution
and the mutability of the species served to increase the
activity in the biological and natural sciences. Thomas
Huxley carried the war into the theological camps and
Herbert Spencer questioned the entire offerings of social
development by asking, What Knowledge Is of Most
Worth?
Herbert Spencer's work was not original in thought;
nevertheless he was responsible in reshaping educational
thinking in England and in America to the extent of
emphasizing a knowledge of science as the most useful
and most practical of all school subjects. This philosophy
was suited to the times in American culture when general
expansion in practically every walk of life was in the
atmosphere and when every political, religious, economic,
or educational idea was put to the test of utility.
EDUCATIONAL LEADERS
Men of vision and courage, such as Charles W. Eliot,
Andrew D. White, Frederick Barnard, James B. Angell,
and Daniel C. Gilman were particularly sensitive to the
changing conditions in American society.
Charles W. Eliot, President of Harvard University from
1869 to 1909, was most sensitive to the changes which
the industrial revolution and the Civil War had brought
in America. During his administration many notable
changes in the government of Harvard occurred, its
scope and objectives were broadened. Through his
advocacy of the "elective" college curriculum, new sub-
jects were added to the program of studies. Harvard's
schools of law and medicine were placed upon a sound
professional basis. Probably his most significant con-
tribution may be found in his constant endeavour to
improve the standards in every phase of educational
life.
Andrew D. White, on September 1, 1862, sent an appeal
36
to his friend, Gerrit Smith, to join him in founding "a
new University, worthy of our land and time." It was
to be "an asylum for Science where truth shall be
sought for truth's sake," and not one "exactly to fit
Revealed Religion.” It was "to foster a new Literature-
not graceful but earnest, as well as a Moral Philosophy,
History, and Political Economy unwarped to suit present
abuses in Politics and Religion." It was "to offer the
rudiments, at least of a legal training in which Legality
shall not crush Humanity;" and it should be a "nucleus
around which liberal-minded men of learning
· could
cluster."'84 His plan emphasized among other branches of
learning, the importance of agriculture, engineering, and
natural sciences. These were the ideas which President
White contributed later when Cornell University was
established and he served as its first leader.
•
James B. Angell outlined, in his inaugural address as
President of the University of Michigan, his philosophy
of higher education which was in perfect harmony with
the days of 1871. It was his self-imposed task to arouse
an interest in the university among the people of the
State, so that they would come to regard the state uni-
versity as an integral and necessary part of the public
educational system. He sought to broaden the college
curriculum and to make possible a college education for
those who had not had a classical preparation.
Frederick A. P. Barnard was the active influence in creat
ing the modern Columbia University. He was the tenth
President of Columbia College in New York City, hold-
ing office from 1864 to 1889. In one of his early reports,
he pointed out that "zealous devotees of good learning
have been accustomed to resort. . . to schools of higher
learning in other lands for that superior instruction
which they have not been able to find at home."85 He
pointed out that
there was a time in the history of this country when the
dependence of our people upon the institutions of the Old
84. Cornell Alumni News, August, 1931, p. 445.
85. F. A. P. Barnard, op. cit., p. 343.
37
World for all education above the elementary was as com-
plete as it has more recently been for the highest. Before
the Revolution, every man of means among the colonists
felt it incumbent on him to send his son to the old country
for that liberal culture which it was believed could not then
be found nearer than Oxford or Cambridge.86
However, times have changed and improvements have
been made "in the creation of lecture courses for post-
graduate instruction in a few of the older and better
endowed of the colleges of our country." 87 Nevertheless,
continued Mr. Barnard in a later report,
In past years it has seemed to be an impression almost
universally prevailing among the young men graduating
from American colleges with aspirations for making a
career in a learned or scientific profession, or in the edu-
cational field, that a residence of one or more years at a
German university was indispensable to anything like signal
success
But with the large opportunities now offered
on this side of the Atlantic
this false impression is
destined soon to disappear.88
Daniel C. Gilman's leadership in the cause of scientific
schools has already been mentioned. However, his con-
tribution to American civilization is best seen in his
zealous program for making it possible for American
scholars to develop their powers of originality, their
responsibility as gentlemen and scholars in our own
American universities. The establishment of the Johns
Hopkins University, as America's first real University,
is the crowning glory of Mr. Gilman's life activities.
Up to the last quarter of the last century, "there has
existed no form of an educational institution which we can
call 'the American university,'-if by this term we intend
to designate something other and higher than the Amer-
ican college.'
P
9989
86. Ibid., pp. 343-4.
87. Ibid.
88. Ibid., p. 376.
89. George T. Ladd, The Development of the American Univer-
sity. Scribner's Magazine II (September, 1887), p. 346.
38

FROM
J
DANIEL C. GILMAN,
President of the Johns Hopkins University.
braft of a plane
Нак
for organisation
O drens Hopkins
University
dctober 1875
})!
}
}
})
})
SASAKA
+
39
#
Oxford
Oct. 5.1875.
[xue proposed regulations were
worlden out at the time oplace.
above mentioned, after many
vinets & conferences. While river
formally adopted in 15 Min.
に
​mot
of
bem observed.


them have actral
actually
April 1882. ]
بجانا

40
*
The Trustees appointed by the founder reserve
essons
to themselves a their euccessors
the right
To hold and administer all the property com.
mitted to them
To appoint and remove all the fort
officers of instruction, government and
administrations
on which
To determine the general principle, on
the institution shall be organized and
conducted
To provide the accessory
by
buildings and
apparatus, to fix the emoluments of all
officers a to regulate the fees of students
To confer academic degrees.
}
41
The President of the University will be the pre-
- siding officer of the Faculty, and the Sp-
-ecutive officer of the Trustees in matters
:pertaining to the government & instruction
of the leniversity
есине
He
may
attend the onectings of the Trustees and
is eligible to a seat in the Board.
-
a
the stall annually present to the Trustees
Report giving full information in respect
to all the departments of the institution,
He may object to the conclusions of the
Faculty, and in case the Faculty still
adhere to their decisions, he must refer
the mather in question to the Trustees
for their decision
42
#
The Faculty shall consist of the permanent
professors and instructors appointed by
the Trustees.
dccauinal lecturers and assista ets
but on
the
designated by the professors shalf not
be members of the Faculty,
Васи
invitation of the President may attend
the meeters.
nominati
to the Trustees
The Faculty, shall appoint from their own
who shall preside
dear
number ~ GLatina
in the absence of the President, shall
see that a tone
a true record is kept of all
the proceeding of the Faculty, and shall
Love the custody of all papers belonging
to the Faculty, - sincluding the records of dire
- cipline, scholarship
Dean shall hold office for three years, eligi
ble to re-appointment
* Examinations. The
43
The Faculty, shall be convened at the opening"
and close of every term, & offener at the
discretion of the President, or in his absence
or inability to act, of the Dear.
The Faculty shall determine the couser
of instruction, to be established; the
conditions of admission,
admission, promotion
a graduation; the Lour
агаст тре...
assigned to the different instructors;
the regulations requisite for the proms.
tion of order, & moraling among
for the excouragement of
the
a
students
study
^
>
44
seademic Council
There shall be an Executive Committee
to act in all matters referred to them by
the Trustees or the Faculty, especially
to aid the President in the government
of the University,
o in the formation of
plans for the Larmonious development
of all the departments.
This committee shall consist of the
The President
The Dean
designated by
A delegate for the Trustees
Two delegates from the Faculty.
representing literary a the other scientifi
studies: the three last named delegater tobe
теб
annually appointed subject to in election.
The trustees may enlarge this Council as
University increases by designating other members,
the Council
mes any
∙ance of professors who are ast members of the Council
t
at
time morte the attend.
one
C
45
as candidate for matriculation
Students shall not be received until
my have complited seventeen years of
age and Love saterfied. The faculty
that they qualified to pursue the
Studies here laid down provided.
ale
!
Standard
There shall be two doors of ad-
- mission, in one of which the knowledge
of Grech, Latin reMathematics, as in the
best Americas college, shall be required,
in the other knowledge of mathematics,
Latin, astea Firench or
German, and
one branch of saticial serice.
a
-
46
CHAPTER IV
F
THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
*
*
PREVIEW
Johns Hopkins University was organized as the first
real university in America. The Board of Trustees
proceeded slowly and carefully in formulating sound
principles and policies of organization. In fact, Mr.
Daniel C. Gilman, the first President, proceeded so
judiciously that little administrative change was made
necessary by his successors. The organization is very
simple. Administrative control rests chiefly with the
faculty which is organized as a faculty of philosophy.
There is no graduate school and no graduate dean specifi-
cally designated as such. Each department, having a
chairman, is autonomous. Throughout, a lack of adminis-
trative prescription is more noticeable than the function-
ing of a positive administrative machinery.
*
*
As the American people were celebrating the one-
hundredth anniversary of their political freedom, there
appeared the dawn of an intellectual freedom which
was to emancipate the American people from the fetters
of superstition and ignorance of the past. This new
intellectual or academic freedom was to result in "less
misery among the poor, less ignorance in the schools,
less bigotry in the temple, less suffering in the hospi-
47
tal."90
All this was to be made possible by the new
American institution known originally as The Univer-
sity, later, as the Graduate School.
The first real university was made possible by a bequest
of Mr. Johns Hopkins of Baltimore for the incorporation
of an institution, which was later chartered on August
24, 1867, "for the promotion of education in the State
of Maryland." Approximately three years after the
incorporation, June 13, 1870, the Trustees met and elected
Galloway Cheston, President of the Board, and William
Hopkins, a brother of the donor, as Secretary. On the
death of the founder, December 24, 1873, it appeared
from the codicil of the last will and testament, that
upon due consideration, believing that my said kindred have
been otherwise sufficiently provided for by my said last
will and testament, and by this codicil, I have determined
and I do hereby give, devise and bequest all the said
rest, residue and remainder of the estate, real and personal,
of which I shall be seized or possessed at my death, of what-
soever nature and description the same may be to "The
Johns Hopkins University' and to "The Johns Hopkins Hos-
pital,' as tenants in common, and not as joint tenants, to
be equally divided between them, share and share alike.
Each of the two institutions received an endowment
estimated in round numbers at about three and a half
million dollars. The gift⁹1 to the University included
his estate of Clifton, 330 acres of land, 1,500 shares of
the common stock of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad
Company of which the par value was $1,500,000, and
other securities which were valued at $750,000.92
•
SELECTING THE FIRST PRESIDENT
The first major problem facing the Board of Trustees
when they officially met for the first time on February
6, 1874, was the selection of a leader for this new under-
taking. On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Johns
Hopkins University, President Angell of Michigan, re-
90. Daniel C. Gilman, Inaugural Address. Baltimore, 1876.
91. See Appendix A, in this study, for a fuller extract of the will.
92. D. C. Gilman, The Johns Hopkins University from 1873-1893,
p. 2.
48
vealed who it was that influenced the Trustees in their
choice. He stated that the trustees
did me the honor to write me a letter, and as I was after-
wards informed, they wrote a similar letter to President
Eliot and to President White (of Cornell) asking whom we
would suggest for the office of President. And now I have
this remarkable statement to make to you: that without
the least conference between us three, we all wrote letters,
telling them the one man was Daniel C. Gilman of California.
That is one of the few acts of my life which I have never
regretted.93
The trustees started communication with Mr. Gilman
through their chairman, Mr. Reveredy Johnson, Jr., who
outlined in his letter the nature of the institution they
had in mind. He wrote, in part:
Baltimore, 23d October, 1874.
President Gilman,
University of California.
Dear Sir:
I believe you are appraised of the existence and character
of the Institution which I represent. It is the recipient of
a fund of some three and a half millions of dollars-with
no shackles of state or political influence, and with no
restrictions but the wisdom and sound judgment of the
Board of Trustees. No denominational, freed from all
sectional bias, and entirely plastic in the hands of those
to whom its founder has entrusted its organization and
development.
In casting around for a suitable person to whom to
entrust the development of the Institution, your name has
been most prominent, coming with the fullest endorsement
from the heads of the leading universities, East and West;
and I have been instructed by the Board to open correspond-
ence with you, looking to your acceptance of the presi-
dency
·
Yours, very respectfully,
REVEREDY JOHNSON, Jr.
Chairman.
The idea of establishing and developing a university
"freed from all sectional bias, and entirely plastic" in
his hands appealed to Mr. Gilman. He promptly sent
a letter signifying his acceptance and in which he stated
his reason for dissatisfaction with conditions at the Uni-
versity of California. He wrote, in part:
93. Fabian Franklin, The Life of Daniel Coit Gilman, p. 194.
49
Oakland, California, November 10, 1874.
Reveredy Johnson, Jr., Esq.,
Dear Sir:
My personal inclination would lead me to resign my posi-
tion here at once irrespective of any call elsewhere, on the
ground that, however well we would build up the University
of California, its foundations are unstable because dependent
on legislative control and popular clamor. These conclusions
are different from what they were represented to be at the
time of my coming here, the so-called Political Code having
essentially altered the Original Act of the University.
I shall immediately propose to the Regents to release me
from their service. I shall then be free to accept the posi-
tion to which you refer. But I hope that a formal and final
decision will not be required of me, on your part, until we
have met face to face.
I am, dear Sir,
momo
Very Respectfully Yours,
D. C. GILMAN.
While still at the University of California, Mr. Gilman
had in mind that the new Johns Hopkins University
was not to be a mere duplication of other institutions
of higher learning. This was in perfect harmony with
the idea of Wilhelm von Humboldt in founding the Uni-
versity of Berlin. Both of these intellectual giants were
resolved that their respective institutions should be quite
distinct from other schools.
The day after Mr. Gilman had an interview with the
members of the Board of Trustees, a reporter for The
Nation quotes Mr. Gilman as having said to the Trustees
that in substance:
he would make it the means of promoting scholarship of
the first order, and this by only offering the kind of in-
struction to advanced students which other universities offer
in their post-graduate courses .94
This early statement was further outlined by Mr.
Gilman in a letter to one of his friends. He wrote, in
part:
Oakland, January 30, 1875.
My dear Brush,
I have just mailed a letter signifying my formal accept-
ance of the J. H. Univ. Pres., my delay having been occasion-
ed not by hesitation, but by deference to others
I
incline more and more to the belief that what is wanted in
Baltimore is not a scientific school, nor a classical college,
•
94. The Nation, January 28, 1875.
50
nor both combined; but a faculty of medicine, and a faculty
of philosophy; that the usual college machinery of classes,
commencements, etc., may be dispensed with; that each
head of a great department, with his associates in that
department,-say of Mathematics, or of Language or of
Chemistry or of History, etc.,-shall be as far as possible
free from the interference of other heads of departments,
and shall determine what scholars he will receive and how
he will teach them; that advanced special students be first
provided for; that degrees be given when scholars are ready
to be granted, in one year or in ten after their admission.
Yours ever,
D. C. G.
TRUSTEES AND PRESIDENT GILMAN
STUDY AMERICAN COLLEGES AND
EUROPEAN UNIVERSITIES
The extreme carefulness of the Trustees in the selec-
tion of the right man for this new institution, is further
observed in the slow and methodical procedure in their
attempt to incorporate into their establishment the best
educational policies and the best type of organization
which human genius could devise. To this end, the
Trustees were early led to study the best institutions
in this and other countries. Hence they informed them-
selves by prolonged interviews and visits to the most
prominent institutions of higher learning in America.
Discussions and correspondence were carried on with
college presidents, professors, and administrators of
scientific and literary institutions. In order to obtain
reliable information of European Universities, Mr. Gil-
man was requested to visit universities in Great Britain,
Germany, Austria, France, and other European coun-
tries, "confer with European scholars and bring home
fresh impressions of the progress of foreign universities,
as well as plans, programmes, reports and other educa-
tional documents."95
Mr. Gilman's correspondence shows that he visited
Paris, Strassburg, Geneva, Zurich, Basel, Freiburg in
Baden, Heidelberg, Frankfort, Berlin, Leipsic, Dresden,
95. First Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University, Balti-
more, 1876, p. 15.
1
1
51
***
Munich, and several places in England. His correspon-
dence with the Trustees from many of these places re-
veals his constant watch for ideas which might be signif-
icant in the organization of Johns Hopkins University.
Mr. Gilman remained about a month in England before
sailing back to America. It was here, while at Oxford,
that he set his pen to work outlining the first draft of
a proposed organization for the Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity. The pages at the beginning of this chapter consti-
tute a complete photostatic copy of the proposal in Mr.
Gilman's own handwriting.96
This proposed organization is of particular interest in
the history of the organization of Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity in that it shows the thinking of President Gilman
as to the internal organization of the University. The
first by-laws, published in 1874, pertain only to the rules
and regulations of the Board of Trustees. Although
President Gilman first thought of a "Chairman" as the
presiding officer of the faculty, he later changed his
mind and used the title of "Dean." However, "it is
noteworthy," writes President Ames in his annual report
to the Trustees of Johns Hopkins University, "that the
organization of the School of Higher Studies in the
Faculty of Philosophy-what is often called the Gradute
School in many universities-does not have a Dean .
The President . . . as a matter of fact, performs the
duties of the Dean of the Graduate School, as known in
most institutions."97 The term "dean," then, does not
96. This evidence is offered with due respect to President Emer-
itus Lowell of Harvard University, who stated: "From
Gilman's inaugural address in 1876 as the first President
of Johns Hopkins University it is difficult to discover a
definite plan of operation. Perhaps it was not so clear in
his own mind at that time
(In his: At War with
Academic Traditions, op. cit., p. 207.) It is true, President
Gilman did not outline a detailed program of operation.
He did have a plan in his mind, as the photostats show. Mr.
Gilman was interested in his inaugural address in setting
forth basic principles of operation.
•
97. Annual Report of the President of The Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity, 1934-1935, p. 4.
52
enter into the vocabulary of Johns Hopkins University,
save in the undergraduate division.
On January 17, 1876, the following preliminary an-
nouncement was made to the public:
PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT
The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md., will re-
ceive Students on Tuesday, the third of October, 1876.
Previous to that time, and as soon as the appointments
are made, the names of the Professors and Instructors in
Scientific and Literary departments, will be publicly made
known. The Faculties of Medicine and Law will not be
organized at present, nor will all the proposed chairs in
the Faculty of Philosophy be filled at first. There will
be professors and assistant professors in Greek, Latin,
German, French and English; in Mathematics, pure and
applied; in Physics and in Chemistry; in Natural History
or Biology, and in Geology. At an early day, if not at the
beginning, there will be professors in History and Meta-
physics. Prolonged courses of academic lectures may also
be expected from non-resident Professors, now connected
with the older colleges of the country.
BASIC PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
INAUGURATED BY PRESIDENT GILMAN
The inaugural address delivered on February 22, 1876,
was not accompanied by any accessories, except the
presentation of Mr. Huxley, the speaker. There was
"no other speech, no music, no opening prayer, no bene-
diction. I had proposed," writes President Gilman, "to
two of the most religious trustees that there should be
an introductory prayer, and they said no, preferring
that the discourse should be given as popular lectures
are given."98 And thus once more, the principle of "no
denominational ties" as outlined by the Chairman of the
Trustees, Mr. Reveredy Johnson, Jr., to Mr. Gilman on
the twenty-third of March, 1874, was observed.
President Gilman's address discussed three principal
topics, namely, first, the chief object of the university;
second, the scope of Johns Hopkins; and third, the basic
principles which shall govern the authorities in the ad-
ministration of their trust.
98. Daniel C. Gilman, The Launching of a University, and Other
Papers, p. 22.
>
53
The object of the University was expressed by the
President in the following words. He said in his in-
augural address:
The object of the university is to develop character-to
make men. It misses its aim if it produces learned pedants,
or simple artisans, or cunning sophists or pretentious prac-
titioners. Its purpose is not so much to impart knowledge
to the pupils, as to whet the appetite, exhibit methods,
develop powers, strengthen judgment, and invigorate the
intellectual and moral forces. It should prepare for the
service of society a class of students who will be wise,
thoughtful, progressive guides in whatever department of
work or thought they may be engaged.99
Ten years later, President Gilman, in his eleventh
annual report, looked back over the decade since the
founding of the University and reminded the Board of
Trustees of the purpose of their existence in these words:
I hope that those who have occasion to look back on the
earliest years of this foundation, will discover that earnest
endeavors have been put forth for the advancement of
knowledge and for the strengthening of intellectual and
moral character.100
What was to be the scope of Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity? The answer to this question is given best by
President Gilman himself. In his inaugural address
he stated:
The Trustees have decided to begin with those things
which are fundamental and move gradually forward to
those which are accessory. They will institute at first
those chairs of language, mathematics, ethics, history, and
science which are commonly grouped under the name of
the Department of Philosophy.
An enduring foundation, a slow development; first local,
then regional, then national influence; the most liberal pro-
motion of all useful knowledge; the special provision of
such departments as are elsewhere neglected in the country;
a generous affiliation with all other institutions, avoiding
interferences, and engaging in no rivalry; the encourage-
ment of research; the promotion of young men, and the
advancement of individual scholars, who by their excellence
will advance the sciences they pursue, and the society where
they dwell.101
The basic principles which serve as the foundation
99. Daniel C. Gilman, Inaugural Address of Daniel C. Gilman
As President of The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore,
February 22, 1876, p. 38.
100. Eleventh Annual Report of the President, Johns Hopkins
University, 1886, p. 63.
101. D. C. Gilman, Inaugural Address, op. cit., p. 39.
54
stones for the sound administration of this University
were likewise stressed by President Gilman in his in-
augural address, and again in his first annual report,
more fully in his third annual report and again in his
ninth report in which he stated: "We have seen thus
far no reason to deviate, in any important particular,
from the principles under which we began our work
nine years or more ago."102 The following thirteen basic
principles served as the guiding stars of the Johns
Hopkins University. They are:
1. All Sciences are worthy of promotion.
2. Religion has nothing to fear from science, and
science need not be afraid of religion. Religion
claims to interpret the word of God, and science to
reveal the laws of God.
3. Remote utility is quite as worthy to be thought of
as immediate advantage.
4. As it is impossible for any university to encourage
with equal freedom all branches of learning, a selec-
tion must be made by enlightened governors, and
that selection must depend on the requirements and
deficiencies of a given people, in a given period.
There is no absolute standard of preference. What
is more important at one time or in one place may
be less needed elsewhere and otherwise.
5. Individual students cannot pursue all branches of
learning, and must be allowed to select, under the
guidance of those who are appointed to counsel
them.
6. Teachers and pupils must be allowed great freedom
in their method of work. Recitations, lectures,
examinations, laboratories, libraries, field exercises,
travel, are all legitimate means of culture.
7. The best scholars will almost invariably be those
who make special attainments on the foundation of
a broad and liberal culture.
102. Ninth Annual Report of the President of Johns Hopkins
University, Baltimore, 1884, p. 59.
!
55
8. The best teachers are usually those who are free,
competent and willing to make original researches
in the library and the laboratory.
9. The best investigators are usually those who have
also the responsibilities of instruction, gaining thus
the incitement of colleagues, the encouragement of
pupils, the observation of the public.
10. Universities should bestow their honors with a
sparing hand; their benefits most freely.
11. A university cannot be created in a day; it is and
must be a slow growth.
12. The object of the University is to develop intellec-
tual giants, to make and develop character, to
make men.
13. Universities easily fall into ruts.
epoch requires a fresh start.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN THE
SELECTION OF A FACULTY
Almost every
With these guiding principles clearly before the Presi-
dent and the Trustees, the organization of a faculty
challenged their immediate attention. President Gilman
has said on several occasions: "the first requisite of
success in any institution is a staff of eminent teachers,
each of whom gives freely the best of which he is cap-
able."103
The reason for this is obvious. "It is their
researches in the library and the laboratory; their
utterances in the classroom and in private; their example
as students and investigators, and as champions of the
truth; their publications, through the journals and the
scientific treatises, which make the University
attraction to the best students, and serviceable to the
intellectual growth of the land."104 Hence, in the selec-
tion of the faculty the following principles are discern-
an
103. Third Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, Maryland, 1878, p. 10.
104. Daniel C. Gilman, The Launching of a University, p. 42.
56
ible in the history of Johns Hopkins University from
the very beginning, namely: The authorities should
consider:
1. The devotion of the candidate to some particular
line of study and the certainty of his eminence in
that specialty.
2. The candidate's power to pursue independent and
original investigation and to inspire the young
with enthusiasm for study and research.
3. The willingness of the candidate to cooperate in
building up the institution.
4. The candidate's freedom from tendencies toward
ecclesiastical or sectional controversies.
5. The best person whose services they could secure
in the position to be filled, irrespective of the place
where he was born, or the college in which he was
trained, or the religious body with which he might
be enrolled.
6. Those personal characteristics which cannot be
rigorously defined, but which cannot be overlooked
if the ethical as well as the intellectual character
of the professional station is considered, and if the
social relations of a teacher to his colleagues, his
pupils, and their friends, are to be harmoniously
maintained.
In commenting upon the importance of the faculty,
President Gilman realized that all faculty members are
not alike, and that no stereotyped pattern of selection
is possible. The principle that every individual is a
law into himself was fully recognized. "The best varies
with the individual," writes President Gilman; "one may
be an admirable lecturer or teacher; another a profound
thinker; a third a keen investigator; another a skillful
experimentor; the next, a man of great acquisition; one
may excel by his industry, another by his enthusiasm,
another by his learning, another by his genius; but every
1
I
57
member of a faculty should be distinguished by some
uncommon attainments, and by special aptitudes."105
ORGANIZATION OF THE FACULTY
On May 25, 1875, the following regulations pertaining
to the nomination and classification of faculty members
were adopted by the Board of Trustees.
NOMINATIONS OF PROFESSORS
The Executive Committee shall forthwith direct the
President to make inquiries in respect to the selection of
Professors and Instructors, and this committee shall report
to the Board, next autumn, the result of these inquiries
with names of such persons as they recommend for appoint-
ment. An interval of two weeks shall pass after such a
report is made before the Board proceeds to the selection
of any permanent Professors.
THREE CLASSES OF TEACHERS
The Committee shall have in mind the appointment of
three classes of teachers:
Class I, the Permanent Professors, on whom will rest
the chief responsibility of instruction and government, and
who will be expected to give to the University their time
and strength.
The effort shall be to secure the services of men of ac-
knowledged ability and reputation, who are distinguished in
special departments of study and who are capable of ad-
vancing these departments and of inciting young men to
study and research. Among the number should be some
who can be especially helpful in the organization of the
University, and in influencing the character of young men.
Class II will include Professors and Lecturers, resident
or non-resident in Baltimore, who will give but a limited
amount of time and service to this University, and who
will be expected to take part in the administrative work.
These instructors should be men of attainments in special-
ities which do not at present require full Professorships,
and men whose marked ability will be of service to the
University. Professors in other colleges may thus be called
to the Johns Hopkins University for a portion of the year,
and possibly men from other lands.
Class III will include adjuncts and Assistants, who will
usually be appointed for periods varying from one to five
years. Their work will be chiefly subordinate to and in
connection with the work of the permanent professors,
who should be consulted in respect to their selection. The
effort should be made to secure young men of ability and
promise from whom the staff of permanent teachers may
be in time reenforced.
105. Third Annual Report, op. cit.; and in Gilman's review of
The Johns Hopkins University from 1873 to 1893, p. 4.
58
In addition to President Gilman, the faculty was se-
lected and approved. It consisted of six professors, six
lecturers, fourteen associates, and five assistants. The
first major faculty was composed of graduates of Euro-
pean universities, such as Göttingen, Oxford, London,
and Cambridge; and of American colleges, of a medical
school, and of a technological school. These scholars
brought to Johns Hopkins University experiences
gained as members of faculties in Christ College, Cam-
bridge, University of Tubingen, New York University,
University of Virginia, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
and in the Royal Military Academy, Wolwick. This
distinguished faculty was:
Dec.
Appointed
30, 1874
Jan. 3, 1876
March 5, 1876
April 17, 1876
April 17, 1876
Sept. 4, 1876
Sept. 4, 1876
ACADEMIC STAFF
President
Gilman, Daniel C.
Professors
Gildersleeve, Basil L.
Sylvester, J. J.
Remsen, Ira
Rowland, Henry A.
Martin, H. Newell
Morris, Charles D.
·
Greek
Mathematics
Chemistry
Physics
Biology
Classics
The administration of Johns Hopkins University has
always had a division of responsibilities. The business
management, including the determination of salaries,
the approval of the budget, the construction and repair
of buildings, the safeguarding of securities and invest-
ments has always been in the hands of the Trustees.
Although on April 4, 1892, the University President
became ex-officio a member of the Board of Trustees,
nevertheless, the President nor any other member of
the faculty has had a share in these fundamental pro-
ceedings.
The internal administration of instruction "shall chiefly
rest with the Faculty," under the guidance of the Presi-
dent, "subject to the approval of the Board."106 "It has
been the duty of the Faculty," writes President Gilman
106. Minutes of the Board of Trustees, May 25, 1875.
C
59
in his last report, in 1901, "to arrange the course of
study, to select the minor assistants, to order apparatus,
to hold examinations for admission and graduation, and
to select the candidates for academic honors. Of late
years they have also nominated to the Trustees candi-
dates for important offices in the teaching staff, as
vacancies occurred."107
The faculty was organized as a faculty of philosophy
or the liberal arts-although there was an important
nucleus of a department of medicine. (The Johns Hopkins
Hospital was opened on May 7, 1889.) By authority of
the Board of Trustees an Academic Council has met since
the organization of the University "to guide the various
departments of study, to select the Fellows, and to act
upon such other matters as may be brought before
them."108 The composition of this Council is stated in
the by-laws which reads as follows:
The Council consists of the President of the University,
the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences (Undergraduate
school), the Director of the Walter Hines Page School of
International Relations, and ten members of the Philo-
sophical Faculty who have the tenure of office of a Pro-
fessor who are appointed by the President upon the nomina-
tion of the Faculty, each of these ten holding office for
five years and not being eligible for reappointment until
one year has elapsed after the expiration of a term of office.
sors
Nominations are made in accordance with the following
procedure by the votes of those professors, associate profes-
and collegiate professors and associates who have
held such appointment for a minimum of five years whose
appointments were made upon the recommendations of the
Council: On the occurrence of a vacancy, the President
causes notification to be sent to each person qualified to
vote, and designates a date on or before which all ballots
must be sent in; the ballot is without nominations, and is
cast in such a way as to render it anonymous; the President,
the Secretary of the Academic Council, and the Secretary
of the Board of the University Studies form a committee to
prescribe the method of casting the ballot and canvassing
the vote, and report the result in detail to the President.
The person, or in case there is more than one vacancy to
be filled, the persons, receiving the largest number of votes
is considered as nominated, with the proviso that a minimum
of one-third of the number of the total electorate is requisite
107. Twenty-Sixth Annual Report of the President of Johns
The
Hopkins University, 1901, p. 45.
108. School of Higher Studies of the Faculty of Philosophy,
Johns Hopkins University Circular, April, 1938, p. 12.
60
to election. If no nomination results, a new ballot is taken
upon the three names which have received the largest num-
ber of votes.109
This, the present organization of the Academic Council,
was made effective during the academic year of 1929-30.
Previous to this time, members of the Council have been
appointed for terms of five years, and have been eligible
for renomination by the Faculty and for reappointment.
According to the new regulations, members of the Council
whose terms expire are not eligible for renomination until
one year has elapsed; and the terms of the office of the
present Council have been so changed that two members
retire each October. The reason underlying this change,
which was recommended to the Board of Trustees by
the Council itself, was the realization by the Council
that it had become an established practice for the Faculty
to renominate the men whose terms had expired and
that this practice was not for the general good of the
Faculty. "Responsibility," said President Ames, "should
be shared by all as far as possible."
A further plea for faculty participation in the adminis-
tration of the University was made by President Ames
in his final report (1935) as President of Johns Hopkins
University. In this report he stated:
It seems to me that there should be faculty participation
in administration and general university activities on a scale
that will bring experience of the actualities that are being
faced by the University in attempting to go forward along
given lines. An important degree of participation in uni-
versity administration on the part of the faculty is desirable
if only because it brings a practical knowledge of the limits
within which the university can operate and of the need
for a changing program.110
By request of the Academic Council, on October 8,
1883, a "Board of University Studies, consisting of the
President, Professors, and Associate Professors of the
Philosophical Faculty and of such other officers of in-
struction and administration as may be elected to mem-
109. The Organization of The Johns Hopkins University... A Re-
vised Statement prepared by the President's Office. (Not
for Circulation.) Mimeographed Sheets, pp. 1 and 2.
110. Report of the President of the University, 1935-36.
The
Johns Hopkins University Circular, 1936, p. 10.
61
bership by action of the Academic Council, has charge of
the arrangements for the instruction of advanced students
and of the examinations for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy and Master of Arts."111
REQUIREMENTS FOR DEGREES
"President Gilman's one mistake," says President
Emeritus Lowell of Harvard, "if it was a mistake.
was that of conferring degrees. He would have done
better to confer no degrees and let their productions
speak for themselves."112 However, demands for degrees,
similar to those conferred in European universities re-
vealed themselves in no mistaken terms. In fact, "many
inquiries have been made as to whether candidates not
connected with this institution might come up at stated
times and be examined for the diploma, without receiv-
ing here systematic instruction."113 The scheme of the
University of London was frequently suggested in the
first days of Johns Hopkins as a desirable plan. This,
however, was not adopted in the Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity.
The requirements for the doctorate of philosophy
degree were that each candidate devote "his attention
to one main subject and to one subsidiary subject." It
was required that these primary subjects be "sufficiently
broad to require prolonged and arduous study, and that
the secondary subjects be pertinent to the principal
theme." It was expected that each candidate have a
reading knowledge of Latin, French, and German. Like-
wise, it was expected that the candidate show evidence
of acquaintance with the methods of modern scientific
research. In every case, the candidate must present an
elaborate thesis on a topic approved by his chief adviser.
"The preparation of this thesis requires labor for the
111. School of Higher Studies of the Faculty of Philosophy,
op. cit., p. 13.
112. Lowell, op. cit., p. 209.
113. Third Annual Report, The Johns Hopkins University, 1878,
p. 37.
62
greater part of an academic year, and the completed
paper is supposed to show the candidate's mastery of
his subject, his powers of independent thought as well
as of careful research, and his ability to express, in clear
and systematic order, and in appropriate language, the
results of his study."114 The thesis being approved by a
Faculty member, the personal examination of the candi-
date proceeds, varying in accordance with the require-
ments of the subject matter. Furthermore,
as a part of the examination, the candidate appears before
the professors collectively, or before some of their number,
and submits to an oral questioning; at another time pre-
pared questions are set before him for careful answers in
writing.
In addition to the resident professors, scholars of dis-
tinction are from time to time invited to participate in the
examination, and examine the thesis of the candidates. The
object of this provision is to secure an estimate of the work
of the candidates from those who are not responsible for
their daily progress.115
In 1888, the requirements for this advanced degree
were modified to the extent that now there must be a
preliminary examination held by a committee of the Board
of Universities Studies and that the thesis be printed.
Likewise the candidate must be able to translate French
and German into English. Latin was no longer specified.
The degree was now offered to those who continue their
studies for three years or more after having attained
the baccalaureate degree. As to the thesis, the follow-
ing regulations were specified:
The thesis must be written on a theme approved by the
adviser of the candidate, and must be completed and sub-
mitted through him to the Board, at least four weeks before
the written examinations are held, unless the adviser re-
quests that for reasons satisfactory to the Board, an excep-
tion be made. The thesis must be legibly written, and
paged and bound according to a prescribed form, which can
be seen in the Library. A biographical sketch of the author
shall be appended to the thesis;
The Board shall designate two members of the academic
staff as referees, who shall present a written report on the
thesis,―said report to be filed;
The candidate shall print the thesis in full or in part, and
114. Third Annual Report, The Johns Hopkins University, 1878,
p. 37.
115. Ibid.
63
if in part, to the extent of not less than twenty-four octavo
pages, under the supervision of his adviser, within one
year of the time when the degree is conferred, and shall
present one hundred and fifty copies of the work to the
University;
If the thesis has not already been printed, a deposit of $50,
to insure its printing within the specified period, shall be
made by the candidate at the Treasurer's office, before
the degree is conferred. This deposit shall be returned
to him when the printed copies are presented to the Uni-
versity.116
SELECTING THE STUDENT BODY
"The second requisite of a university is a corps of well-
qualified students," writes President Gilman.117 The
nucleus of such a body was secured from the first by
a system of fellowships. The founder requested the
Trustees to establish a number of scholarships which
were too free the holders thereof from tuition charges.
Twenty such scholarships were awarded from the very
beginning. In addition, “a system of Fellowships was
instituted for the purpose of affording to the young men
of talent from any place, an opportunity to continue
their studies in the Johns Hopkins University, while
looking forward to positions as professors, teachers, and
investigators, or to other literary and scientific vocations.
The Fellowships were not so much honors and prizes of
past achievement, as helps for further progress, and
stepping-stones to honorable intellectual careers
They have been bestowed almost exclusively on young
men desirous of becoming teachers of science and liter-
ature."118
The University expects to be benefited by
their presence and influence, and by their occasional
services. From among the number of these fellows, it
hopes to secure some of its permanent teachers.
•
116. Twelfth Annual Report of the President of The Johns Hop-
kins University, 1887, p. 46.
117. Third Annual Report of Johns Hopkins University, op. cit.,
p. 12.
118. See the Second as well as the Sixth Annual Reports of the
Johns Hopkins University in which the detailed regulations
for the awarding of Fellowships are given.
64
IMPORTANCE OF A LIBRARY TO
A UNIVERSITY
With all the care and thought that entered into the
making of Johns Hopkins University, there is, however,
one serious charge against the early founder of this
institution. Professor Boas of Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity writes: "The library as far as my own department
is concerned, is a disgrace, not because the librarian is
at fault, but because the first president of the University
was so short-sighted that he thought we could always
depend upon the Peabody for our source material."119
The Peabody Institute is near the University and has as
President Gilman remarked, "a large, well-chosen, well-
arranged, and well-catalogued collection."120 It was
President Gilman's constant wish and policy, not to
duplicate existing institutions, to utilize all possible re-
sources, and work in mutual harmony with all. Hence,
he felt "there is every reason to rejoice that these
foundations (such as the museums, the libraries, and
the press) can be made so cooperative in promoting the
good of the community. Each adds to the other's effici-
ency."121
The very fact that there were such friendly relations
established between the Trustees of the Peabody Insti-
tute and the Trustees of Johns Hopkins University,122
is partly the explanation for the constant progress made
by Johns Hopkins University. President Gilman him-
self stated:
119. George Boas, Democracy Among Scholars. The Johns Hop-
kins Alumni Magazine (November, 1937), p. 4.
120. D. C. Gilman, The Johns Hopkins University from 1813 to
1893, p. 13.
121. Third Annual Report of Johns Hopkins University, p. 32.
122. The Board of Trustees of the Peabody Institute of the City
of Baltimore, at their Annual Meeting, February 12th,
1876, wrote:
"In view of the establishment of the Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity in our community, and of the wide field thus opened
for the advancement of the intellectual and moral welfare
of our people; and, desiring to establish at the earliest date,
affiliation with it in promoting the educational interests
of the State:
(Cont. on next page)
i
1
?
•
65
Without this aid from the Peabody foundation, our organ-
ization would have been very much delayed, and indeed our
funds would have been seriously curtailed; for,—while
there is no agency except the living teacher, so important
to a University as a large collection of books, freely acces-
sible to those who know how to use them, a good library
is costly to purchase and costly to maintain, and is more-
over of slow growth. We have, therefore, reason to be
constantly grateful that the Peabody foundation so long
preceded the Hopkins.123
It was recognized that "the life of a university depends
upon books. There is no such thing as a strong univer-
sity apart from a great library." To this end the Trus-
tees had made an appropriation in 1876, of thirty thou-
sand dollars for the purchase of books, diagrams, ap-
paratus, and scientific collections. It was proposed
to buy at once such books as are needed every day in the
University, and to keep a portion of them in one convenient
reading room, as a Ready-Reference Library, and to dis-
tribute other portions among the classrooms and lecture
rooms.124
(Footnote 122 continued)
"Resolved, That the Board of Trustees of the Peabody In-
stitute convey to the President and Trustees of the Johns
Hopkins University this expression of interest and good
will; suggesting that this Institute being, within its scope,
an educational element of the State, should be in sympathy
with the University, and by interchange of courtesy and
cooperation, assist in its high educational aim.
"Resolved, That the Secretary address a copy of the Resolu-
tion to the President and Board of Trustees of the Johns
Hopkins University.
Attest,
GEORGE P. TIFFANY, Secretary."
On the reception of the foregoing resolutions, by the Uni-
versity Trustees, it was, on motion
"Resolved, That the President and Trustees of the Johns
Hopkins University reciprocate, most cordially, the senti-
ments conveyed in the communication referred to, and
heartily unite in the desire to join hands with the Peabody
Institute, in all that could advance the cause of education,
refinement and culture in our City and State; and would
convey to the President and Trustees of the Peabody Insti-
tute, their appreciation of the courtesy which prompted
the expressions conveyed in their Resolutions.
"Resolved, That the Secretary be requested to remit a copy
of the Resolution to the President and Trustees of the
Peabody Institute.
Attest,
WILLIAM HOPKINS, Secretary.
Quoted from Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins Univer.
sity, January 1, 1877, pp. 19-20.
123. Fourth Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University,
1879, p. 17.
124. First Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University, p. 24.
66
In the organization of the library, several principles
were clearly marked out by the Trustees and which, in
the main, have successfully worked out. These princi-
ples are:
1. To gather a small reference library of such books
as is essential to have constantly at hand; and to
supplement this, from time to time, as the growth
and needs of the University should render necessary.
2. To collect for the different departments special
libraries to be placed apart for their ready use and
reference.
3. To render accessible, by an arrangement with the
other libraries of Baltimore, all valuable periodicals
in the various branches of scholarly research.
4. To secure for the members of the University an
opportunity for the inspection of noteworthy books
of general interest, whose purchase was not in-
cluded in the plan of the library proper.
5. To arrange the library in rooms easy of access, and
open for reading and study during such hours of
day and evening as would be convenient for all.125
The library serves a most useful purpose in any society
of scholars. However, in any true university it is a means
to an end. The library is the storehouse of knowledge,
whereas the university aims to expand existing know-
ledge.
ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOL OF HIGHER
STUDIES OF THE FACULTY OF
PHILOSOPHY
The stimulus for research comes in a large measure
from the learned men who make up the faculty of phi-
losophy. Johns Hopkins University was, from its very
infancy, primarily concerned in developing the Faculty
of Philosophy. The basic principles of operation were so
125. Second Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University,
1877, p. 31.
67
well established that there was little need for constant
change in organization. However, with an ever increas-
ing number of graduate students and a greater demand
for the doctorate, the Academic Council, in the fall of
1927, adopted the following organization of the Philo-
sophical Faculty, namely:
1. There will be a Faculty of Philosophy, whose various
departments will be so organized as to admit students
for advanced study on the general basis of two prelimi-
nary years of collegiate work. It is definitely understood
that only exceptional students will be admitted with this
preparation, and that each department will establish its
own standards of admission.
2. There will be a College of Arts and Sciences in which
instruction will be limited to such courses as may be
specified by the Academic Council.
3. At the end of the second year of residence in the College,
qualified students who wish to pursue certain courses
may do so with the consent of the department of the
Faculty of Philosophy concerned. They may become
candidates for the degree of Master of Arts or for that
of Doctor of Philosophy in that department by satisfying
the requirements of the Board of University Studies.
Others may, with the consent of the Board of Collegiate
Studies, be permitted to remain in the college either
to prepare themselves further for admission to the Faculty
of Philosophy or as candidates for the degree of Bachelor
of Arts. Such permission will be given only to those
students who give evidence by the character of their
work that they should be encouraged to acquire a liberal
education or to prepare for professional training.
4. By consent of the proper Committee and of the depart-
ment of the Faculty of Philosophy concerned, students
in the College may be permitted in special cases to take
certain courses in the former, for which credit will be
given towards the A. B. degree.126
The faculty of Philosophy became known as the School
of Higher Studies of the Faculty of Philosophy. The
new plan permitted approved students to enter the School
of Higher Studies after two years of college work. A
year after this new plan went into effect, the success of
the plan was recorded in the President's Annual Report
in the following words:
The students have been able to carry the work which has
been given them, and indeed, some of the instructors say
that it is impossible to detect any differences between them
126. Annual Report of the President of the Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity, 1926-27, pp. 86-7.
68
and other students who come in after longer preparation
in college.127
Realizing that a majority of students working for the
doctorate degree will never continue their researches
after they leave their Alma Mater, the majority of them
becoming teachers in colleges, the question arose as to
the effect of this training. Hence, the question was
asked: "Is it not the duty of the University to give these
graduate students such training that they will be better
teachers than they otherwise would be?" This called for
departmental study and proposals to meet their problems.
Since there is no graduate school and no graduate dean
at Johns Hopkins University, each department is perfectly
autonomous. The Chemistry Department, for example,
subsequently required "a certain number of their students,
who are planning to become teachers, to spend an addi-
tional year in preparing for the Doctor's degree and to
devote a certain amount of time during each of their
years of preparation to pedagogical method and prac-
tice."128
Other departments are cooperating in other
ways with the Department of Education.
The organization of the School of Higher Studies of
the Faculty of Philosophy in the Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity is very simple in principle. It is organized on the
departmental basis. In general, the organization con-
sists of:
1.
2.
3.
The Board of Trustees
1)
Executive Committee
2)
Finance Committee
3) Building Committee
The President of the University, Secretary and Treasurer
The Faculty of Philosophy
The Academic Council
1)
2) The Board of University Studies
3)
4)
Departments of Study
Committees
a. Committee on the Library
b. Committee on Public Lectures
C.
Committee on Applications for Advanced Degrees
d. Committee on Scholarships
127. Report of the President of the University,
Johns Hopkins University Circular, p. 14.
128. Report of the President of the University,
Johns Hopkins University Circular, p. 6.
1927-28, The
1929-30, The
:
i
69
ORGANIZATION BASED UPON
DEPARTMENTAL SYSTEM
Since the general administrative atmosphere is one of
local autonomy, each department has a mode of operation
and organization best suited to its needs. The following
plan of the organization of the Chemistry Department
is typical.129
1. The faculty consists of three professors, one associate
professor, four associates, and four instructors. The
faculty meets every Monday noon at luncheon in the
chemistry building to discuss the general business of the
department. There is an Executive Committee, appointed
by the President, consisting of the three professors, the
associate professor, and one of the associates, which
takes up certain matters in connection with appointments
that are obviously not suitable material for discussion
for the whole faculty.
2. The administrative officers of the department consist of
a chairman and a secretary appointed by the President
of the University. The secretary takes care of matters
pertaining to student records and the general records of
the transactions of the faculty.
3. The standing committees of the department are:
a.
an admission committee of which the secretary of
the department is chairman. This committee gathers
the material pertaining to men applying for admission
to the department to do graduate work, makes re-
commendations for admissions and the awards of
appointments to scholarships, and laboratory assist-
antships to men entering the department.
b.
a student advisory committee consisting of the chair-
This
man, the secretary, and one of the professors.
committee takes the students in charge after they
arrive in the department, is responsible for advising
them as to schedules, arranges for general examina-
tions and the like, and looking after other matters
pertaining to the students until the students go on
research. When the students are accepted by a
professor for a research problem, the professor then
takes the responsibility over from this Committee.
committee
instruction which
undergraduate instruction
handles all details such as advising, arranging of
curricula, certification of credit and recommenda-
tions to students going on to other institutions.
a
on
c.
d.
a library committee which supervises the purchases of
books for the library and the general operation of
the library.
4. Administration of the laboratory. The details of the
129. This plan of departmental organization was made possible
through the kind cooperation of the Chairman of the Depart-
ment, Donald H. Andrews.
70
administration of the laboratory are in charge of the
director of the laboratory, who at the present time is
also the chairman of the department. He is assisted
by one of the instructors who has the title of "Assistant
to the Director." Details of laboratory administration
are carried out by the curator of the laboratory who is
head of the technical staff. The stockroom attendants
and mechanics are responsible directly to the curator who
also serves as purchasing agent.
Materials for regular courses are specified in advance
by the instructors, purchased and stocked. Current
needs are handled through requisitions signed by the
professors from which orders are made out and signed
by the director of the laboratory. These are sent to the
firms from which the purchases are made. These are
paid against the item in the university budget for general
expenses of the department.
5. The secretarial staff of the department consists of an
executive secretary, a general secretary, and a librarian.
The executive secretary is responsible for the operation
of the secretarial service.
It should be perfectly clear that each department at
Johns Hopkins University is an autonomous organization
and makes its own rules to meet the best interests of
the department. As new problems arise, the department
is perfectly free to change its organization and methods
of operation.
ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION
MUST BE FLEXIBLE
Institutions, even though founded in any one year,
cannot give us the true norm, or type of organization.
This will come as the result of a living development.
President Bowman stated in his 1937 Annual Report
that "continuing effort with cumulative effect is the
central doctrine of education in a democratic process,"
and he proceeds to point out certain principles which have
been found to be as valid today as they were in 1876.
Some of them may be stated as follows:
An educational institution exists to benefit the community
and the country.
Its most distinctive form of benefit is derived from in-
tellectual pioneering, a creative process that transforms
teaching of its conventional type into an adventure in dis-
covery. There can be no life in a University without in-
tellectual growth.
To implement the purpose of the University, two conditions
must be met: men of exceptional ability must comprise the
71
faculty; and there must be constant and critical restatement
of the relation of the University to the community.130
To bring this about an organization must be set up
which is based upon sound principles. However, where
research is the institutional watchword, organization
must be flexible. In fact, the present writer when visit-
ing the Johns Hopkins University and interviewing one
of the administrators of the University concerning the
organization and administration of the Johns Hopkins
University was told: "We are totally ignorant of organ-
ization." Professor Boas observes that "there has been
here, to the best of my knowledge, a minimum of formal
regulations the pedantic subservience to the letter, and
a maximum of respect for the individual-the scholar's
respect for the spirit."131 Doctor Bredvold points out
how the spirit of academic freedom permeates the entire
system of education at Johns Hopkins University. Having
served a year as a member of the School of Higher Stud-
ies of the Faculty of Philosophy, Professor Bredvold
writes: "Under the Hopkins system, or lack of system,
the graduate student never receives a grade in a course;
he receives comment and criticism. But I believe that
after he has participated for some time in the work of
the classes and the journal club, as well as in the in-
formal discussions with his fellow students, he has more
information about himself than any set of grades could
give him. Commenting upon "the lack" of administrative
prescription in the lecture hall, Doctor Bredvold writes:
"For once in my life I did not feel urgently compelled
to 'finish' a course; I stopped where I was when the
time allotted me had expired, with the very comfortable
feeling that my students would continue where the course
left off. Where there is no pressure for quantity, one
has time for quality. What seems to be administrative
looseness is in fact a pedagogical gain."132
130. Report of the President of the University, 1936-37, The
Johns Hopkins University Circular, p. 7.
131. George Boas, op. cit., p. 4
The
132. Louis I. Bredvold, An Outsider Appraises Hopkins.
Johns Hopkins Alumni Magazine (April, 1938), p. 89.
Italics by the present writer.
72
CHAPTER V
THE HISTORY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF ITS ADMINIS-
TRATION SINCE 1880
*
*
PREVIEW
*
*
Approximately a half century passed from the found-
ing of Johns Hopkins University in 1876 to the organiza-
tion of the graduate school in Brown University in 1927.
During this half century, which may be called the forma-
tive period in the history of the graduate school, graduate
work was in its earliest stages the product of the guidance
of individual faculty members. With increased demand
for advanced learning, an effective organization became
imperative. No complete uniformity of organization or
nomenclature is to be found in the various graduate
schools throughout the country, but the basic principles.
which make for productive scholarship are readily dis-
cernible.
*
-
Since the opening of Johns Hopkins University in 1876,
emphasis is given in certain places to the idea that
college instruction is disciplinary, requiring definite, but
not uniform methods, and a certain deference to the
authority of a master. In the university, however, "in-
struction is much freer, and the scholar is encouraged
to inquire rather than to accept; to test and observe
rather than to hear and recite; to walk with a friendly
guide rather than to obey a commander."
73
In conformity with this latter view, Columbia Univer-
sity, in 1880, established a separate school for the political
and social sciences. Approximately a decade later, three
new institutions were established on the basis of study,
investigation, and research, namely, the Catholic Uni-
versity of America, Clark University, and Chicago Uni-
versity. Only two institutions, namely, the Catholic
University and Clark University were established origin-
ally as pure graduate schools, called, however, univer-
sities. Johns Hopkins University and the University of
Chicago developed from the beginning an undergraduate
as well as a graduate school simultaneously. In 1880,
Columbia University, and two years later, Yale Univer-
sity, organized a graduate school as the capstone to their
already existing undergraduate schools.
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA IS FIRST STATE
UNIVERSITY TO ORGANIZE GRADUATE WORK.
Among the State universities, the leadership in organ-
ized graduate work was taken by the University of
Nebraska. As early as 1886, an announcement was made
that the graduates of the University of Nebraska or of
other institutions whose undergraduate courses were of
equivalent value, would be granted a Master's degree
on the completion of one year's resident study, in a satis-
factory manner.133 In 1890, the Regents recommended
that the degree of Doctor of Philosophy be given on the
condition that no extra expenses be incurred for instruc-
tion.134
At the time, few departments made provision
for this graduate work. Six years later, April 16, 1896,
the graduate school was organized in accordance with
the recommendations of the Chancellor, under the name
of Graduate School, and Professor A. H. Edgren was
133. A. B. Biehn, The Development of the University of Nebraska,
Master's Thesis, Lincoln, The University of Nebraska, July,
1934, p. 138.
Minutes of the Board of Regents, University of Nebraska,
June 12, 1890.
134.
74
made dean.135 Although the University of Nebraska was
the first among the State universities to establish a
Graduate School, the University of Kansas was not far
behind. In fact, the University of Kansas was but one
year behind that of the University of Nebraska in or
ganizing its graduate work. In the Faculty Records it
is stated:
By vote of the Faculty of the University of Kansas, October
20, 1887, the supervision of the work of candidates for
degrees higher than the Bachelor's degree was entrusted
to a standing committee of three, to be appointed by the
Chancellor.136
On June 10, 1897, it is recorded in the Minutes of the
Committee on Graduate Students:
The first meeting of the Faculty of the Graduate School
was held in the Chancellor's office, Thursday, June 10, 1897
The Chancellor announces the appointment by the
Regents of Mr. Blackmar as Dean of the School.137
Inasmuch as the organization of an institution is de-
termined in terms of its purpose and functions, and in-
asmuch as the purpose and function of the Graduate
School is the same in both public and private univer-
sities, no further distinction between these types of in-
stitutions seems warranted.
Within another decade, the organization of a graduate
school in the universities became very popular. In fact,
the expression "the university, that is, the graduate
school," became common.138 A study of the literature
in these early days reveals an interesting variety of
reasons for organizing graduate schools. Some of these
reasons overlap, but are here presented to throw further
light on the arguments presented in favor of such an
organization.
135. Ibid., April 16, 1896.
136. Faculty Records, University of Kansas, p. 108.
137. Minutes of the Committee on Graduate Students, Univer-
sity of Kansas, p. 128.
138. A. Lawrence Lowell, At War with Academic Traditions in
America, p. 214.
75
REASONS FOR ORGANIZING
GRADUATE SCHOOLS
1. A graduate school can establish greater uniformity in
dealing with graduate problems.
2. A graduate school can more adequately promote research
and advanced learning.
3. A graduate school can offer men and women a chance
to prepare themselves by special training for the work
of advancing the sum total of human knowledge.
4. A graduate school will attract and retain a scholarly
and scientific faculty.
5. A graduate school can furnish opportunities for that
investigative work which is absolutely essential to the
development of a real university.
6. A graduate school can include in a single organization,
under one faculty, the graduate work of all colleges
and schools of the university leading to higher non-
professional degrees.
7. A graduate school can provide facilities for advanced
students to prosecute their studies to the point of
original research and in the various branches of science
and art.
-
8. A graduate school tends to raise the level and main-
tain the efficiency of the undergraduate departments.
9. A graduate school will give dignity and coherence to
graduate work.
10. A graduate school is needed to promote greater economy.
11. The graduate school is the only place in which teachers
in the high schools and colleges can obtain advanced
preparation needed for their work. (This was especially
true in the earlier days of the graduate school.)
12. The graduate school seeks to do for the arts and sciences,
technical and applied, what the engineering and agricul-
tural stations are doing for applied sciences in their
respective fields. Progress in the applied sciences rests
upon progress in pure science.
In face of such arguments and claims there can be
little doubt as to the imperative need of a strong research
organization. The work of an engineering experiment
station, for example, cannot make very much progress if
research in physics and mathematics is neglected. The
development of an agricultural experiment station will
soon cease if continued experimentation in chemistry
and in the biological science were to cease. In short,
research in all lines is the absolutely essential condition
of progress.
76
The accompanying table shows the date when "Gradu-
ate Schools" were established in the various universities:
YEAR IN WHICH THE GRADUATE SCHOOL WAS
ORGANIZED IN THE 28 UNIVERSITIES
Institution
Brown University
Catholic University
Clark University
Columbia University
Cornell University
Harvard University
Indiana University
Johns Hopkins University
Northwestern University
Ohio State University
Princeton University
Stanford University
State University of Iowa
University of California
University of Chicago
University of Illinois
University of Kansas
University of Michigan
University of Minnesota
University of Missouri
University of Nebraska
University of North Carolina
University of Pennsylvania
University of Texas
University of Virginia
University of Wisconsin
Washington University
Yale University
··
...
..
·
Year of
Organization
1927
18891
1889
1880
1909
1890
1904
1876
1910
1911
1. Reorganized under title of Gradute School in 1930.
The development of graduate instruction and the or-
ganization of graduate schools were somewhat slower in
State universities. Owing to the demands of undergrad-
uate instruction in a great variety of subjects, research
in pure science had to be carried on in many places in
the spare moments of the professors and frequently under
the guise of some utilitarian quest. Frequently those
responsible for providing the funds to these universities
as well as many influential citizens could see no practical
value in such an undertaking. But universities like
Michigan, Wisconsin, and California demonstrated the
1901
1900
1900
1909
1890
1906
1896
1915
1905
1910
1895
1904
1906
1910
1904
1892
1922
1892
77
wisdom and value of fostering the finest scholarship and
the most advanced research. The State of Illinois led
the way in making definite appropriations for a graduate
school.
Today we usually speak of "the Graduate School," and
understand exactly what is meant. However, the nomen-
clature is not uniform throughout the institutions here
studied. The official names, besides that of "The Gradu-
ate School" assigned by the various institutions of higher
learning are:
NOMENCLATURES OTHER THAN
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy, and Pure Science:
Columbia.
School of Higher Studies of the Faculty of Philosophy:
Johns Hopkins.
The Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies:
Michigan.
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences: Harvard, and
Catholic.
Graduate Divisions: Clark, California and Stanford.
School of Graduate Studies: Washington (St. Louis.)
Department of Graduate Studies: Virginia.
Graduate College: Nebraska, and Iowa.
There seems to be some confusion in the use of the
term "Graduate College." In the Universities of Nebras-
ka and Iowa, the Graduate College is the same as is
usually thought of as the Graduate School. At Princeton,
however, will be found a "Graduate School" and a "Grad-
uate College." Here the Graduate School is the official
body through which advanced degrees are obtained, while
the "Graduate College" is merely the dormitory and
refectory of graduate students, with the incidental social
arrangements. Responsibility for the administration and
conduct of this "Residential Graduate Hall" is placed in
the hands of the Dean of the Graduate School and the
University Faculty.139
The history of the Graduate School as found in the
various universities, other than that of Johns Hopkins
139. Minutes of the Board of Trustees, Princeton University,
April 8, 1909, Chapter VIII, section 5.
78
University which has already been presented, may logical-
ly be presented under three major headings, namely:
First, those which were originally established as graduate
schools.
Second, the one in which the graduate and undergraduate
divisions were established and developed simultaneously.
Third, those which followed the College-University pattern,
i. e., those which first established a college and later
added a graduate school.
SECTION I
INSTITUTIONS ESTABLISHED ESSENTIALLY
AS "GRADUATE SCHOOLS"
Clark University
Catholic University of America
CLARK UNIVERSITY
Twelve years after the opening of Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity, Mr. Jonas Gilman Clark, one of the wealthiest
men of New England, announced his financial pledges
for a new institution where young men could get the
sort of college training that he himself would have been
glad to obtain in the days of his youth. Accordingly,
in March, 1887, the Clark University was incorporated
as "an institution for the promotion of education and
investigation in science, literature and art."140
G. STANLEY HALL, THE FIRST PRESIDENT
The Trustees set forth their ideas as to the kind of an
institution they desired in their letter to Doctor G. Stanley
Hall, Professor of Philosophy, Psychology and Education
at Johns Hopkins University, inviting him to the Presi-
dency of Clark University. In their letter, dated April
3, 1888, they stated that the Trustees
Desire to impose on you no trammels; they have no friends
for whom they wish to provide at the expense of the interests
140. Act of Incorporation.
眞
​+
→ |
·
***
79
of the institution; no pet theories to press upon you in dero-
gation of your judgment; no sectarian tests to apply; no
guarantees to require, save such as are implied in your
acceptance of this trust. Their single desire is to fit men
for the highest duties of life, and to that end, that this
institution in whatever branches of sound learning it may
find itself engaged, may be a leader and a light.141
The invitation was accepted by Dr. Hall on May first
of the same year with the understanding that he would
not be persuaded to leave his intellectually attractive
position at Johns Hopkins University merely to organize
"another College of the New England type, or even the
attempt to duplicate those that are best among established
institutions old or new."142 He proposed an institution
which should be devoted primarily to advanced work.
AN INNOVATION IN AMERICAN
HIGHER EDUCATION
The founder consented to Doctor Hall's proposal and
after granting the new president a year's leave of ab-
sence, with full salary, to visit European universities,
it was decided to open Clark University as a Graduate
School. This was a distinct innovation in American
higher education-one which even Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity had not been able to make, namely, to organize a
university without an undergraduate department.
The opening exercises of Clark University were held
on October 2, 1889. The University was organized and
limited to five departments, namely, (1) Mathematics;
(2) Physics, Experimental and Theoretical; (3) Chemis-
try; (4) Biology, including Anatomy, Physiology, and
Paleontology; and (5) Psychology, including Neurology,
Anthropology, and Education. A sub-department of Edu-
cation was established in 1892, and the Chemistry Depart-
ment was temporarily discontinued in 1894.
141. Quoted in Story, William E., Clark University, Worcester,
Massachusetts, p. 4.
142. Wallace W. Atwood, The First Fifty Years, An Administra-
tive Report, p. 4.
80
A CRITICAL CRISIS
In organizing the faculty, President Hall endeavored
to attract the best talent available. In so doing, the
instructional cost exceeded the income from the original
grant of Mr. Clark, with the result that there was a
misunderstanding between the founder and the President.
A financial crisis faced the University and the faculty
complained that legitimate expectations, based, as they
supposed, upon official assurance had not been fulfilled
and no assurance for the future was obtainable. The
faculty was ready to resign. At the moment President
Harper of the newly established University of Chicago,
seeking a scholarly faculty, easily made terms with the
faculty members and took a number of them to Chicago.
By the end of the year, only two full time faculty mem-
bers remained and these were in hearty agreement with
President Hall.
In the Fall of 1892, reorganization got under way.
The original idea of graduate work with emphasis on
research was preserved. But while Mr. Clark, the found-
er, took pleasure in the work of the University, he was
more determined than ever to include a collegiate depart-
ment in the University. Mr. Clark died in 1900, and in
his last will, he provided for a separate endowment for
the establishment of a collegiate department with a presi-
dent other than Doctor Hall, because the latter did not
favor the diversion of funds for college work.
This new Clark College was opened in 1902, with
Colonel Carroll D. Wright, then United States Commis-
sioner of Labor, as its first president. This college was
to prepare young men "for useful citizenship and their
work in life." The College and University, while under
the direction of the same Board of Trustees, utilizing
the same library, buildings and grounds, and some of the
University faculty also taking charge of some of the
collegiate classes, were nevertheless, under separate ad-
ministrations. President Wright continued in the admin-
istration of Clark College to the time of his death in
81
1909, when Doctor Edmund C. Sanford was transferred
from the University Department of Psychology to the
presidency as the successor to Colonel Wright.
In 1920, the Board of Trustees accepted President
Hall's request to be relieved of his responsibilities.
Simultaneously, President Sanford, believing that the
time was opportune for the union of college and univer-
sity under a single administration, tendered his resigna-
tion, with the request that he be permitted to return to
his earlier professorial duties.
REORGANIZATION
For over a year the Trustees deliberated as to the best
procedure for a reorganization which would unite the
University and the College. They believed that their
institution could offer something new and distinctive.
The study of Geography, including Physiography, Anthro-
pogeography, Climatology, Land Utilization, Foreign
Trade, and Industrial and Political Geography, was now
in much the same position as was Psychology at the
opening of the University in 1888.
ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERSHIP
OF WALLACE W. ATWOOD
Doctor Wallace W. Atwood of Harvard University was
selected as the new President who was to reorganize the
financially crippled institution and consolidate the college
and university. Doctor Atwood entered upon his new
duties at the beginning of the academic year, 1920, and
was formally inaugurated on February 1, 1921. After
studying the situation, President Atwood proposed a re-
organization plan based on the principle of unification.
This was immediately adopted by the Trustees and put
into operation in the academic year 1921-1922.
According to the new plan, a "General Faculty has
control of educational matters pertaining to the Univer-
sity as a whole; a small Collegiate Board has adminis-
82
trative charge of the details of the undergraduate divi-
sion, subject to the supervisory authority of the General
Faculty; and a Graduate Board . . . which has exclusive
jurisdiction over strictly graduate affairs."143
The new organization of the University consists of
first, the university faculty; second a university senate;
third, a graduate board; and fourth, a college board.
There are four general committees, namely: the com-
mittee on extension courses and special students, the
committee on personnel and organization, the committee
on curriculum, and the committee on the summer school.
As stated in the catalogue: "The Graduate Board con-
sists of the President and the representatives of the de-
partment offering advanced graduate instruction. It has
general control of the work of the Graduate Division of
the University and is responsible for the nomination to
the Board of Trustees of candidates for the degrees of
Master of Arts and of Doctor of Philosophy."144 This
Graduate Board has two standing committees, namely,
the committee on credentials, and the committee on pro-
ficiency in foreign languages. The former "passes upon
applications for admission to the graduate division and
makes recommendations to the Graduate Board in respect
to fellowships and scholarships and candidacy for grad-
uate degrees." while the latter committee "examines
candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and for
proficiency in foreign languages.”
The curricular offerings were organized into three
groups of courses: one, planned primarily for under-
graduate students; the second for upper-classmen and
graduate students; and a third, primarily for graduate
students.
-
According to President Atwood,145 the advantages
claimed for such an organization may be stated as follows:
1. The union of the graduate with the undergraduate divi-
sion under one administration saved a certain amount
of administrative duplication.
143. Atwood, op. cit., p. 15.
144. Clark University Bulletin, Catalogue Number, 1938, pp. 14-18.
145. Atwood, op. cit., p. 15.
die
}
督
​83
2. Members of the teaching staffs became members
one faculty, the faculty of Clark University.
3. College students have a larger group of courses from
which to select the courses of study.
4. They have an opportunity of working with a larger
faculty, including some of the faculty members who are
devoting most of their time to graduate work.
of
5. It provides an earlier introduction of undergraduates
to research.
The special features of Clark University may be cited
as follows:
1. The President does not spend all of his time in adminis-
tration; he is also a teacher. (The title of Doctor Atwood
is given as: President, Professor of Physical and Region-
al Geography, and Director of the Graduate School of
Geography.)
2. It is small in size.
3. Its unprecedented absence of rules.
4. Its utterly untrammelled academic freedom.
5. Each department is almost as independent and autono-
mous as if there were no other.
6. There are no graduate deans.
7. There is no tyranny of departmental heads.
The administrative routine of the Graduate School at
Clark University is reduced to a minimum. The spirit
of the institution has been described by President Atwood:
"We work together as a society of scholars in which
there are very intimate personal relationships between
the various members of the staff and the students who
have been accepted for admission to candidacy for higher
degrees." 146
The ideals of Clark University are being realized. The
University is providing young men of limited means a
college education at moderate cost. This is in harmony
with the desires of Jonas G. Clark, the founder. Second,
the University is striving to make continuous additions
to the sum total of existing human knowledge. This is
in keeping with the aspirations of G. Stanley Hall. Third,
under the expert administrative leadership of President
Atwood, Clark University is making its contribution to
world peace by developing in students and scholars a
146. Statement made by President Atwood to the present writer,
December 28, 1938.
84
better understanding and appreciation of the human
element in various parts of the world. This is being
made possible through the organization and administra-
tion of the Graduate School of Geography.
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA
In 1886 a so-called Second Plenary Council was held
in the city of Baltimore, in which the attending prelates
gave voice to the positive need for an institution under
Roman Catholic control, where true philosophy would
be given a home. Such early leaders as Archbishops
Kean, Spaulding, Ryan, Ireland, and Gibbons, were in
no small measure responsible for the building of the
Catholic University of America. In a meeting of the
Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, held in 1884, Arch-
bishop Spaulding observed:
We will begin as the University of Paris began in the twelfth
century, and as the present University of Louvain began
fifty years ago, with a national school of philosophy and
theology, which will form the central faculty of a complete
educational organism. Around this, the other faculties
will take their places, in due course of time.147
The University was incorporated in the District of
Columbia on April 19, 1887.
These civil rights were
confirmed and enlarged by a special enactment of the
United States under date of April 3, 1928. Ecclesiastical
approbation was granted to this University by Pope Leo
XIII, in the Apostolic Letter Magni Nobis Gaudii, dated
March 7, 1889.
PLAN OF ORGANIZATION
The plan of organization was to be centered about ad-
vanced work in the fields of theology, philosophy, and
ecclesiastical law. From the very beginning, the founders
and professors had in mind a type of work which was
strictly on the Graduate basis. The aim of the Univer-
sity is stated in the General Statutes in these words:
147. Peter Guilday, Graduate Studies. Printed Privately for the
use of the Graduate Students of the Catholic University of
America, Washington, D. C., 1924, p. 70.
85
The aim of the Catholic University of America is to search
out truth scientifically, to safeguard it, and apply it to the
moulding and shaping of both private and public life.148
The first lectures in the School of Sacred Sciences were
given in November, 1889. Later on, the following schools
were created: the School of Philosophy, the School of
Letters, and the School of Physical Sciences in 1895;
the School of Civil Law in 1898; and the School of Canon
Law in 1923. In 1930, the departments which until then
had been included in the Schools of Philosophy, Letters,
and Sciences were merged in the Graduate School of
Arts and Sciences and in the College of Arts and Sciences.
The administrative responsibilities of the University
are in the hands of the Board of Trustees, the Chancellor,
and the Rector. The Archbishop of Baltimore de jure,
holds the office of Chancellor and it is his primary duty
to safeguard the orthodoxy of doctrine, to represent the
"Apostolic See in the solemn conferring of Academic
Degrees," and he "acquaints the Sacred Congregation
of Seminaries and Universities with the more important
University matters and submits to it every three years
an accurate report of the condition of the University."149
The Rector is a resident officer who governs the Uni-
versity in accordance with the provisions of the Statutes,
in which it is stated:
The Rector of the University must be a citizen of the United
States of America, a priest, and a Doctor of Sacred Theology
or of Canon Law or of Philosophy. He must be conspicuous
for integrity, scholarship, and administrative ability. He
is appointed by the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and
Universities (in Rome, Italy) acting on the recommenda-
tion of the Board of Trustees, who shall have previously
consulted with the Academic Senate.150
The Rector is assisted by a Vice-Rector who must also
comply with the same qualifications as the Rector, a
Procurator, a General Secretary, and a finance commit-
tee. An Academic Senate is charged with adjusting and
coordinating the faculties and schools of the University,
148. Statutes of the Catholic University of America, Washington,
D. C., Part I, Chapter I, Article 1.
149. Statutes of the Catholic University of America, Part I,
Chapter II, Section 2, Article 21.
150. Ibid., Part I, Chapter II, Section 3, Article 23.
86
seeing "to it that the courses of study and the methods
of teaching in the schools be constantly perfected," and
proposes "to the Board of Trustees, with the consent
of the faculty concerned the names of associate profes-
sors regarded as eligible for promotion to the rank of
Ordinary Professors," and also proposes to the Chancellor
the names of candidates for academic degrees.
Since 1930, the administration of the Graduate School
of Arts and Sciences is in the hands of a dean who reg-
ulates matters of common concern to all departments
and coordinates matters peculiar to each department.
The Heads of the Departments of the Graduate School
constitute a Council of the Graduate School of which
the Dean of the School is de jure the chairman.
The faculties in the departments consist of ordinary
professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and
instructors. These are assisted by teachers, such as lec-
turers and assistant instructors. The teachers and in-
structors are appointed for one year, but an instructor
having creditably discharged his duties for five years
may be appointed as an assistant professor. "This period
may be shortened if within that time he shall have con-
tributed to the advancement of knowledge by research
and publication."151 Assistant professors are appointed
for two years, and the associate professor is appointed
for a three-year period. The present writer was told
by an officer of this University "the Full, or Ordinary
Professors are the University." They and they alone
have a final or "deliberative vote," while all others have
a "consultative vote." This distinction is made clearer
by viewing the method of selecting the dean, who
holds office for a two-year period, but may be reappoint-
ed. When the time arrives for deciding upon a new
dean, the Rector calls for a faculty meeting, and in a
very democratic fashion asks for nominations.
As was
described to the writer, frequently the Rector will write
151. Statutes of the Catholic University of America, Part I,
Chapter II, Section 11, Article 54.
87
+
the proposed names on the blackboard-the meeting tak-
ing place in an ordinary lecture room. All teachers and
faculty members may make proposals, this being their
"consultative vote." When nominations are closed, the
Ordinary Professors, and they alone, cast a final vote
for one of the names proposed. This is their "delibera-
tive vote." Of course, the Rector has at all times the
power of veto, but this is rarely used. The final appoint-
ment must be confirmed by the Board of Trustees.
SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS
The outstanding feature of the Graduate School in the
Catholic University of America is "unity in variety."
This is accomplished by establishing social and intellectual
relationships between teachers and students in the various
graduate departments. All students are welded into one
compact body by their training and active participation
in such fundamental courses where the science of biblio-
graphy, the principles of critical analysis, and the me-
chanics of synthetic application of analytical principles
to a given subject are thoroughly mastered. The real
spirit of this type of training reveals itself in the seminar
which has a respected place throughout the entire stu-
dents career.
SECTION II
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
An Institution Where the Undergraduate and Graduate
Schools Were Developed Simultaneously
The old University of Chicago, founded by Stephen
A. Douglas in 1856, was foreclosed in 1886. While the
first University of Chicago was not incorporated until
January 30, 1857, it may nevertheless trace its real be-
ginning to April 2, 1856, when Stephen A. Douglas, who
became a resident of Chicago in 1847, made a grant of
88
about ten acres of land for the purpose of establishing
"an institution of learning of the highest character, which
should be identified with the city, share in its progress,
and stand to it and the great country which surrounds
it in a relation like that of the old seats of learning in
the East."152 This school consisted of four faculties,
namely, that of the Dearborn Observatory; the School
of Law, which was established in 1859; of Theology,
which was established on October 2, 1867, and that of
the Rush Medical College, which was established in 1875.
The University ceased to function after the commence-
ment exercises, June 16, 1886. Its foreclosure was largely,
if not entirely due to first, the great panic of 1857;
second, the Civil War of 1861-65, which caused college
men to enter the ranks of military service; third, the
hard times and panic resulting from the war; and fourth,
the hard times which followed the two great Chicago
fires in 1871 and 1874.
Within a few months after the closing of this first
attempt at establishing a University of Chicago, Mr.
John D. Rockefeller took into consideration the founding
of a new institution of learning in the city of Chicago.
"In the fall of 1888, he conferred with Professor William
R. Harper in regard to it, and finally entered into com-
munication on the subject with Reverend F. T. Gates,
Secretary of the American Baptist Educational Socie-
ty.”153
In December of the same year, the Reverend
Mr. Gates brought the matter before the Board of the
Society and secured its approval. With the financial
support of Mr. John D. Rockefeller and Mr. Marshall
Field of Chicago, the Education Society adopted in June,
1890, the articles of incorporation. The charter for the
152. "History of the University of July 4, 1857. Deposited in
the corner stone." Quoted in Charles H. Koenitzer, History
of the First University of Chicago, 1856-1886. (in the
Rare Book Room, University of Chicago Archives), p. 57.
153. Historical Sketch, in the Annual Register, July 1, 1892-
July 1, 1893, p. 4.
89
new institution was obtained on September 10, 1890.154
In recognition of Mr. Rockefeller's benevolence, the Board
of Trustees enacted that on the seal, letterheads, and
all official publications of the University, the title shall
read: THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, Founded by
John D. Rockefeller.
At the first meeting of the Board of Trustees, Profes-
sor William Rainey Harper of Yale University was elect-
ed President. He accepted the appointment in the spring
of 1891 and reported for duty on July 1, 1891. It was
Mr. Harper's intention, to which Mr. Rockefeller ac-
quiesced, that while the old university had been a pro-
tege of the Baptist denomination, this new venture
"was to be a very university both in the freedom of
its thought and in its scope."155 That it should be
non-sectarian was laid down in the charter, and the same
instrument provided that no religious test should ever
be applied to faculty or students.
GRADUATE WORK EMPHASIZED
The university was organized to lay special emphasis
on graduate work, "to make the work of investigation
primary." Writing about the purpose of the University,
Dean Small stated:
The key to (President Harper's) conception of the Univer-
sity was investigation, research, discovery of something new,
whether of fact, of method, or of valuation. His ideal was
that the University should not merely duplicate what other
universities had been doing and were likely to do in much
greater bulk in the future-viz., pass along the traditions
of accumulated knowledge. He wanted the University to
mark out for itself a distinct field. In brief, its aim
should be to find out how to do better than had ever been
done before everything that falls within the scope of teach-
ing and research.156
In the early part of 1891, about a half million dollars
were designated to the University by the executors and
154. The University of Chicago Official Bulletin, No. 1, January,
1891, p. 3.
155. Nott Flint, The University of Chicago, A Sketch, p. 5.
156. Thomas W. Goodspeed, A History of the University of
Chicago, pp. 371-372.
90
trustees of the estate of William B. Ogden which was to
be utilized for "The Ogden (Graduate) School of Science
of the University of Chicago." At the same time, a
complete prospectus of the University of Chicago, worked
out in detail, was sent to more than fifty American col-
leges and universities for criticism.
On October 1, 1892, nearly 600 students, more than
half coming for graduate study, presented themselves
as the first class in the University. At the first Convoca-
tion meeting in July, 1893, President Harper said:
Students soon learn where good work is done. In under-
graduate work it may be the institution which draws stu.
dents; in graduate work, it is not the institution, but the
man.157
ORGANIZATION OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF CHICAGO
The work of the university was arranged under three
general divisions, viz., the University Proper, the Uni-
versity-Extension Work, and the University Publication
Work. The first of these includes the following:
THE UNIVERSITY PROPER
1.
2.
3.
4.
Academies.
Colleges:
(1) The College of Liberal Arts, in which the curriculum
was arranged with a view to the degree of B. A.
(2) The College of Science, in which the curriculum
was arranged with a view to the degree of B. S.
(3) The College of Literature, in which the curriculum
was arranged with special view to the study of
Modern Language and Literature, History, etc..
with a view, likewise to the degree of B. S.
(4) The College of Practical Arts, in which the cur-
riculum was arranged with greater reference, than
in the other Colleges, to the practical departments
of business and of professional life, with a view
to the degree of B. S.
Affiliated Colleges. (To be determined by existing
circumstances in particular cases.)
Schools:
(1) The Graduate School
(2) The Divinity School
157. Goodspeed, op. cit., p. 369.
91
(3) The Law School
(4) The Medical School
(5) The School of Engineering
(6) The School of Pedagogy·
(7) The School of Fine Arts
(8) The School of Music
The organization of the University consists of the
faculties, the University Council, and executive officers.
It was prescribed that "the officers of the University
who give instruction in any Academy, College, or School
of the University, shall constitute the Faculty of that
Academy, College or School, and shall hold at least one
meeting each month."158
The President or Dean of the Faculty is the presiding
officer. The University Council is composed of "the
President of the University, the Dean of each College
and School with one instructor of the same, to be elected
by the Faculty thereof, the Dean of each Academy of
the University," and such other officers ex-officio, as the
University Examiner, the University Recorder, and the
University Registrar, the University-Extension Secretary,
and the University Librarian. The decisions of the
council should be carried into effect only when approved
by the President. The executive officers and instructors
of the University were:
1.
The President of the University
The University Examiner
2.
3. The University Recorder
4. The University Registrar
5. The University-Extension Secretary
The University Librarian
The University Publisher
The University Steward
Deans of Colleges and Schools
10. Heads of Departments
11.
Lecturers and Teachers
SONORON
(1) The Head-Master, or (Chairman)
(2) The Professor
(3) The Professor Non-Resident
(4) The Associate Professor
(5) The Assistant Professor
(6) The Instructor
(7) The Tutor
(8) The Docent
(9) The Reader
158. The University of Chicago, Official Bulletin, No. 1, January,
1891, p.8.
92
(10) The Lecturer
(11) The Fellow
(12) The Scholar
Admission to the Graduate School was limited to three
types of students, namely, first, graduates with a bache-
lor's degree from the University of Chicago or from other
institutions of high standing; second, special students
at least twenty-one years of age, not candidates for a
degree, provided they offered satisfactory reasons for
entering upon the regular courses; and third, honor
students, "to attend the lectures offered, without under-
taking the ordinary work of the classroom," which privi-
lege was granted only in exceptional cases.
The instruction was offered in each School under three
different headings: (1) courses intended exclusively
for graduate students; (2) courses intended primarily
for graduate students, to which, however, University
College students may be admitted; and (3) courses of-
fered primarily for University College students, to which,
however, graduate students may be admitted.
REQUIREMENTS FOR DEGREES
Candidates for degrees were required to fulfill definite
requirements for any specific degree. The first announce-
ments offered the degree of the Master of Arts, Master
of Science, and Master of Philosophy. Also requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy and that of the
LL.D. were announced. The requirements for the Ph.D.
were:
1. To have completed a Bachelor's course including an
amount of Latin equivalent to that required for the
Bachelor's degree in the University of Chicago.
2. To spend three years of resident study at the University
in pursuance of an accepted course of study.
3. To present a satisfactory printed thesis upon a subject
which has been approved by the head of the school in
which the principal part of the candidate's work has
been done.
4. To pass a satisfactory final examination upon the work
of the three years.159
159. Official Bulletin No. 4, The University of Chicago, April,
1892, p. 5.
די
*
93
Although the LL.D. degree was announced in 1892, it
was revoked the following year. The requirements set
forth were:
1. To have received the degree of Ph.D.
2. To spend three years of resident study at the University,
in pursuance of an accepted course of study.
3. To present a printed thesis upon a subject which had
been approved by the head of the school in which the
principal part of the candidate's work has been done.
4. To pass a satisfactory final examination upon the work
of the three years.
UNIVERSITY ORGANIZATION AND ADMIN-
ISTRATION MUST FOCUS ON RESEARCH
The organization and administration of the University
was centered around the research idea, but it could not
escape the college demands. As a result, especially so
after the World War, some university professors accepted
appointments in research institutes outside of the uni-
versity. "No greater misfortune could happen to Amer-
ican science." writes Dean Gale, " than to have too large
a proportion of its men withdraw from university life."
The importance of keeping research men in the univer-
sity is further emphasized by Dean Gale in these words:
If we are interested in the continued growth of science and
the possibilities of the future, it is vitally important to keep
a large proportion of our most productive men in contact
with the rising generation. It is only in the Graduate
Schools of the Universities that this contact is free and
natural.160
To meet these conditions, Dean Gale advocated that
the administration set aside certain members of the staff
"with the understanding that they devote perhaps one-
half of their time to teaching and one-half to research,
and some, perhaps not many, who are to have their
entire time at their own disposal and have only such
160. Report of the Dean of the Ogden Graduate School of Science,
in, Report of the President, University of Chicago, 1921-22,
p. 9.
94
contact with students as they themselves elect."161 Any
graduate school organized along such lines will undoubt
edly have decided advantages over any research institute.
The distinctive advantage of a graduate school to foster
research is the fact that it has a group of science depart-
ments representing all the fundamental sciences. Hence
Dean Gale points out:
The geologist has contact with the astronomer and mathe-
matician, the pathologist is in touch with the histologist,
the physiologist with the chemist, the botanist with the
physicist, and with all the rest.162
DEPARTMENTAL AUTONOMY
From the very beginning, "the autonomy of depart-
ments" has been not only a theory but has been actually
carried out in practice. The earlier administration was
by permanent "heads" of departments. The head was
supposed to be the most distinguished man in the depart-
ment. At the outset this was in all probability the best
method of building up strong departments. Later, with
additional responsibilities which had to be assumed, a
chairman was substituted for the permanent head, and
in some of the larger departments, a secretary was added.
It was originally contemplated that the chairmanship
should not be held continuously and it was intended that
appointment to chairmanship should not carry with it
any implication as to seniority. It was hoped that the
most eminent scholars of the department would be re-
lieved for at least considerable periods from administra-
tive work.163 However, contrary to expectations, the
chairmanship has been a permanent position.
REORGANIZATION
According to a report of Dean Small, the Faculties of
the University of Chicago, for several years prior to 1921
161. Report of the Dean of the Ogden Graduate School of Science,
op. cit., p. 10.
162. Loc. cit.
163. Report of the Dean of the Faculties.
In the Report of the
President, The University of Chicago, 1923-24, pp. 5-6.
E
95
felt that "the time is approaching for the visible begin-
ning of a new era for our Graduate Schools."164 Again
in the 1929-1930 Annual Report, Dean Laing wrote with
full conviction:
The fact is there is not one good graduate school of the
comprehensive type in the country. There are excellent
research institutes devoted to single branches of study, and
there are excellent departments in the graduate schools of
several universities; but no institution has succeeded in
developing a graduate school that is conducted throughout
on really graduate lines and which awards the doctoral
degree only to those who have given unmistakable evidence
of the qualities of true scholarship or research. That our
graduate school is rated higher than most of the others
is due to the fact that in some respects we come nearer
to or, to state it more precisely, are less distantly removed
from the graduate level. We have many strong points,
but we also have others that are not so strong. A weak.
ness in any part of our line-and by weakness I mean
especially a willingness to accept for a graduate degree
work that, insomuch as it is not in any sense of graduate
value, constitutes only a species of fiat graduate currency
-tends to demoralize the whole school.. For it inevitably
leads to compromises in methods of instruction and in
requirements for degrees.165
Then, Dean Laing points out the chief defect in the
graduate school as being that of not teaching its students
how to be productive scholars. And the reason is that
during the greater part of their residence here they have
been spending their time not on the kind of work that would
make them interested in research problems and skillful in
the presentation of results, but in making up undergradu-
ate deficiencies (for which they get graduate credit), in
listening to lectures on subjects already adequately treated
in textbooks, and in reading in class the works of authors
which they should be expected to read by themselves. The
whole system should be changed.166
As a result of such dissatisfaction, the University
Senate recommended to the Board of Trustees, in 1930,
that the graduate school, the senior college, and the
junior college be abolished. The Senate recommended
the substitution for these organizations, the following
five divisions, namely: the Humanities, the Social Sciences,
the Physical Sciences, the Biological Sciences, and the
College. The first four divisions are to have charge of
164. Report of the President, University of Chicago, 1921-22, p. 4.
165. Report of the Graduate Dean, In the Report of the President,
University of Chicago, 1929-30, p. 3.
166. Ibid., p. 5. (Bold type by present writer.)
96
specialization and investigation in their respective fields.
The College is to be an experimental unit devoted to gen-
eral education. All degrees, including the Bachelor's,
are to be granted on the recommendation of the upper
divisions. The College grants no degrees. It is devoted
to general education. The divisions are devoted to ad-
vanced study. The break between the College and the
divisions is quite definite. The student goes from an
organization with a very distinct purpose to an organiza-
tion with an entirely different purpose. In this connec-
tion, President Hutchins points out an important admin-
istrative problem. He says:
As I have often said, the advantage of graduate schools is
not in the maturity of students, or in the background of
students, but in the segregation of students. If we can
confine college life to the College and develop a graduate
attitude and graduate habits of work in the first years of
the divisions, we shall have students entering a scholarly
atmosphere two years earlier than they have hitherto.167
The general provisions of this reorganization plan,
common to the several ruling bodies are presented in
Appendix B.
The Department of Education has taken a singular
stand in recent years. The early history of this depart-
ment is sketched by Doctor William S. Gray somewhat
as follows. Prior to 1915, many students who were
preparing to teach in high schools registered in the Col-
lege of Education. Following that date, all such students
registered in the College of Arts, Literature, and Science.
However, they continued to elect a limited number of
courses in education in order to satisfy the requirements
of the various standardizing agencies. 168
During the early history of the College of Education
two-year certificates were awarded to prospective elemen-
167. Robert M. Hutchins, The Chicago Plan and Graduate Study,
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Association
of American Universities. Thirty-Third Annual Conference,
1931, p. 139. (Bold type by present writer.)
168. The President's Report Covering the Academic Year July 1,
1929, to June 30, 1930. The University of Chicago Press,
1931, p. 26.
:
알
​!
97
tary school teachers and to those planning to teach the
practical arts. From 1915 to 1922
these certificates were gradually discontinued and only four-
year curriculums were organized. The only elementary
teachers who were trained from that time on in the college
of Education were those preparing to teach in the kinder-
garten and the primary grades. The statement should be
added that the Kindergarten-Primary Department has during
the last few years placed emphasis on the training of super-
visors rather than teachers.169
Since June, 1938, the University of Chicago is offer-
ing a new diploma which is certified by "The Committee
on the Preparation of Teachers," a division of the
Department of Education. The recipient of this certifi-
cate must first have satisfied the academic departments
in which he carried on his major and minor graduate
work. This work is equivalent to that required for the
Master's degree. Over and above that, he must then
satisfy by means of a comprehensive examination his
mastery of educational knowledge and at the same time
be able to apply this knowledge in an actual classroom
situation. The accompanying copy of such a certificate
shows the new emphasis placed upon the importance of
graduate work in subject matter as a prerequisite for
taking professional courses in the Department of Educa-
tion. The order of sequence of study is stated at the
bottom of the certificate. Should John Doe be prepared
to teach in a junior college instead of a secondary school,
the certificate would read the same except that in place
of the phrase "In Secondary Schools" the words "In
Junior College" would appear. This procedure and certi-
fication should mark a new advance for graduate schools
in the preparation of teachers.
PRESIDENT HUTCHINS EVALUATES
THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION
In evaluating the reorganization program, President
Hutchins observes: "The reorganization of the Univer-
169. The President's Report Covering the Academic Year July 1,
1929 to June 30, 1930, op. cit., p. 27.
98
(Sample Copy of New Teaching Certificate)
The University of Chicago
THE COMMITTEE ON THE PREPARATION OF
TEACHERS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT
JOHN DOE
HAS SATISFIED THE ACADEMIC AND PROFES-
SIONAL REQUIREMENTS SET BY THE COMMITTEE
AS NECESSARY TO COMPETENCY IN TEACHING
ZOOLOGY as Primary Subject
BIOLOGY as Secondary Subject
IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS AND IS HEREBY
COMMENDED TO THE FAVORABLE ATTENTION
OF THE SCHOOL AUTHORITIES
CHICAGO
,19
(Sample)
Executive Secretary of the Committee
on the Preparation of Teachers
The academic and professional requirements herein referred to
include:
C.
A. The Attainment of the Degree of Master of Arts Attest-
ing Breadth and Depth of Preparation in the Primary
Subject.
B. The Completion of an Approved Program of Work in
the Secondary Subject Including in Most Cases a Course
in the Exposition of Methods of Teaching that Subject.
The Passing of a Comprehensive Examination Based on
Work in Education, Including:
a) A Study of the American School System; b) Edu-
cational Psychology; c) Exposition of Methods
of Teaching the Primary Subject; d) Appren-
tice Teaching in the Primary Subject.
99
sity. should contribute to the advancement of know-
ledge through attracting, training and stimulating people
who can advance it or train others to do it. The whole
plan should revitalize the research activities of the Uni-
versity." And then the learned President asks: "What
else is necessary?" To which he replies: "A committee
of the University Senate studied this matter for a year,
and came to the conclusion that, 'in the future, as in the
successful past, the quality of the staff will largely deter-
mine the quality of graduate instruction' . . . We do feel
that the changes in our organization will make
teaching and research more attractive and more effective,
and will at the same time adjust the University to the
needs of the individual student."
SECTION III
GRADUATE SCHOOLS IN THE COLLEGE-
UNIVERSITY PATTERN
Institutions Which First Established a College
and Later Added a Graduate School
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
Of all the institutions which first established an under-
graduate college and later developed a graduate school
as the capstone in their educational program, Columbia
University takes the lead. Professor John W. Burgess,
to whom the establishment of a Graduate School at Co-
lumbia University must be credited, gives an account
of the early conditions at Columbia and its subsequent
development. He writes:
The academic year 1879-1880 appeared to both Professor
Smith and myself as no advance upon the two preceding
periods in the subjects which we represented, and, before
the first of January, 1880, we had reached the conclusion
that we must, at once, introduce to the Trustees our ideas
of a separate faculty and school for the political and social
100
sciences, comparative jurisprudence and public law in the
college unity of schools.170
On the evening of April 15, 1880, Professor Burgess
called upon Mr. Trustee Ruggles in his home to submit
his ideas for the improvement of instruction. The exist-
ing conditions at the time are described by Doctor
Nicholas M. Butler at the fiftieth anniversary of the
founding of the School of Political Science in these words:
The educational policy of the University was then primarily
governed by the Committee on Course and Statutes, which
was the forerunner of our Committee on Education. That
Committee was a powerful body; it consisted of rock-ribbed,
conservative Trustees. They had only recently submitted
a unanimous report that under no circumstances could stu-
dents attend after one o'clock. They had given interesting
reasons why instruction in the afternoon was inexpedient;
it was suggested that it bordered on the immoral. 171
During the meeting at the home of Trustee Ruggles,
it was decided "to establish a school for the political and
social sciences, separate from both the School of Arts
and the School of Law, with an independent faculty of
its own." At the same time there were but two institu-
tions in the world that had taken similar steps, namely,
the newly organized University of Strassbourg which had
a Facultät der Kammeralwissenschaften, and the Ecole
Libre des Sciences Politiques, founded in Paris in 1871.
In less than a month after the meeting at Trustee Ruggles'
home, Professor Burgess went to the Ecole libre des
Sciences Politiques and studied its organization. On
June 1, 1880, Professor Burgess received a cablegram
from Trustee Ruggles which read:
THANK GOD THE UNIVERSITY IS BORN.
GO AHEAD.
Upon receiving the above cablegram, Professor Burgess
called to the chairs of the newly created Faculty, Edmund
Munroe Smith, at the time a student of Roman Law and
comparative jurisprudence in the University of Berlin;
and Clifford R. Bateman, who was then a student of
170. John W. Burgess, The Founding of the School of Political
Science, Columbia University Quarterly XXII, No. 4 (Decem-
ber, 1930), p. 368.
171. Burgess, op. cit., p. 376.
F
101
administrative law in the University of Heidelberg. The
three men met upon the terrace in front of the hotel”
in Paris where Professor Burgess at the time resided,
and drew up "the scheme of the separate Faculty of
Political Science in principle and in every important
detail." Briefly, it was the following:
We distributed the subjects of instruction among the four
original departments, of history, political science, constitu-
tional and international law; Roman law and comparative
jurisprudence; administrative law; and political economy
and sociology . . We provided for a regular organ of pub-
lication of the works of the members of the Faculty and
students of the School and of the members of the Academy
in the form of the Political Science Quarterly and of the
Series of Studies in History, Jurisprudence, Economics,
Sociology, and Public law.172
With this account of the early beginning of university
work at Columbia, Professor Burgess states:
And now, Mr. President (Doctor Nicholas Murray Butler)
my part of this story, the part which I alone have been
spared to tell, is finished. The rest is a matter of record
or, better, the rest is a matter of your own experience
You developed the department of philosophy in the School
of Arts into a Faculty of Philosophy of the Graduate School
of Philosophy and organized it, alongside the Faculty of
Political Science and in complete reciprocity therewith, in
unity of Columbia University, with yourself as its Dean;
and, a few years later, as President of the University, you
became chief officer of the Faculty of Political Science and
for nearly thirty years you have been the chief guide and
director of its growth and policy.173
The history of the subsequent development of graduate
work and organization is told by President Butler him-
self in the following words:
The ten years from 1880 to 1890 were filled with commit-
tees, conferences, boards, reports; the pamphlet history of
those years fills volumes, a row two, three feet in length
as they stand on the shelf. Individual professors, faculty
groups, were called on for their opinion, statutes were drawn,
revised and corrected, conferences held, orations delivered.
It took ten years before the University as it is, or as the
Columbia College Unity, was before, grasped fully the
lessons of the School of Political Science and fundamental
philosophy of Professor Burgess.174
The idea of graduate organization was not altogether
172. Burgess, op. cit., p. 372.
173. Ibid., p. 375.
174. Burgess, op. cit., p. 378.
102
the most welcomed idea in the minds of all the professors
at that time. To wit:
At one of the earlier conferences at the house of President
Low, who, when he took office, endeavored to familiarize
himself with this tangled situation and this contention and
debate, Professor Dwight said with some heat that he was
opposed to going forward with this plan because the School
of Political Science was a upas tree planted in the heart of
the University. Frank Goodnow, since President of Johns
Hopkins University, showing not commendable ignorance of
Erasmus, Darwin and Emerson, and Thackeray and Ruskin,
turned to (Doctor Butler) and said, sotto voce, "What the
deuce is a upas tree?" He did not recognize the School
under that description.175
REORGANIZATION OF GRADUATE WORK
IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
In spite of such opposition, the Faculty of Philosophy
was organized in 1890, and that of Pure Science in 1892.
These Faculties were to be subject to the University
Council. This Council, however, "could only be begun
as a consultative body; its votes must be unanimous; in
order to prevent undue faculty control, two members
must be appointed by the President. It took three years
to outgrow this. In the statutes of 1894 and 1895 the
University as we now have it came into existence. It
took that length of time for the idea of the School of
Political Science fully to come into control of the life
and organization of the University."176
At the present time, the organization pattern of the
Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy, and Pure
Science may be thought of as being under the leadership
of a Dean and a "Joint Committee on Graduate Instruc-
tion" composed of thirteen members-the dean and four
representatives from each of the three Faculties. Each
Faculty has its divisions which are composed of the
following departments:
FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
Division of History, Economics and Public Law
Departments: Economics; History; Public Law
Law and
Government; Social Science.
175. Loc. Sit.
176. Burgess, op. cit., p. 378.
103
FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY
Division of Ancient and Oriental Languages
Departments: Chinese; Greek and Latin; Indo-Iranian
and Comparative Linguistics; Semitic Languages.
Division of Education
Department of Education and Educational Research.
Division of Fine Arts, Archaeology, and Music
Departments: Fine Arts and Archaeology; Music.
Division of Modern Languages and Literatures
Departments: East European Languages; English and
Comparative Literature; Germanic Languages;
mance Languages.
Ro-
Division of Philosophy, Psychology and Anthropology
Departments: Anthropology; Philosophy, Psychology.
FACULTY OF PURE SCIENCE
Division of Biology
Departments: Anatomy; Bacteriology; Biological Chem-
istry; Botany; Pathology; Physiology; Zoology.
Division of Chemistry
Departments: Biological Chemistry; Chemistry.
Division of Engineering
Departments: Chemical Engineering; Civil Engineering;
Electrical Engineering; Mechanical Engineering.
Division of Geology, Geography, and Minerology
Departments: Geology and Minerology.
Division of Mathematical and Physical Science
Departments: Astronomy; Mathematics; Physics.
Division of Mining and Metallurgy
Departments: Mining and Metallurgy.
Columbia University having taken the lead in establish-
ing the College-University type of education, other in-
stitutions of higher learning throughout the country
adopted the idea, namely, that the function of the univer-
sity is threefold: first, they teach; second, they accumu-
late knowledge in the form of books and collections; and
third, they investigate, that year after year, day after
day, some new truth may evolve. To accomplish these
ends, President Folwell of Minnesota as early as 1869,
stated in his inaugural address that "the State must
endow the University, and if the State will have the
University in its full proportions, let her first count the
cost, and take the million for her unit."177 At the same
177. The Addresses at the Inauguration of William W. Folwell as
President of the University of Minnesota, Wednesday, De-
cember 22, 1869, p. 30.
104
time, President Andrew D. White of Cornell said, "Divide
your resources for primary education, but combine them
for higher education." In spite of the fact that Univer-
sity education is very expensive, the concept of graduate
education spread somewhat slowly in the decade immedi-
ately following the first graduate school at Columbia.
ORGANIZATION OF GRADUATE SCHOOLS
IN OTHER INSTITUTIONS
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
In order to provide graduate instruction at Harvard
University, a Graduate Department was established there
in 1872. In 1890, the Graduate Department emerged as
the Graduate School of Harvard University, under the
new Faculty of Arts and Sciences, but with administra-
tive officers of its own. The name, however, was changed
in 1905 to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences so
as to distinguish it more clearly from the professional
schools which had assumed a graduate character.
The Graduate School was headed by an Academic Coun-
cil which consisted of all the professors of all faculties. It
was created to administer and recommend candidates for
the degrees of Master of Arts, Master of Science, Doctor
of Philosophy, and Doctor of Science. "The administra-
tion of the School," writes the former Dean Haskins,
"has never been elaborately developed or closely central-
ized. It has no budget except for office expenses, owns
no building, and has no endowment. Its officers have
been a Dean, serving as Chairman of an Administrative
Board of ten or twelve, chosen from the professors most
closely connected with graduate study, and a Secretary,
or Assistant Dean, who has had charge of the routine
work of the office. The Dean has also been a professor;
indeed, instruction has claimed the greater part of his
time, though with the growth of the School he has inevi-
tably had to give more time to consultation with individual
students. The primary direction of the students' work
M
1
105
has continued to lie in the hands of the several professors
and divisions of the Faculty, rather than in the Dean's
office."178
INTEREST IN ORGANIZING GRADUATE
WORK IN OTHER UNIVERSITIES
From 1890 to the end of the century only three other
institutions, in addition to those already mentioned, as-
sumed the task of adding a graduate school to their
already existing colleges, namely, Yale, and the two State
institutions of Nebraska and Kansas. The rush for the
establishment of Graduate Schools occurred in the first
decade of the present century, when almost a dozen of
the universities with which this study is concerned, added
such an organization.
It should be borne in mind that we are here concerned
with the organization of the Graduate Schools and not
with the history of the early offerings of graduate work.
Graduate work was undertaken in many institutions at
a very early date. For example, "Graduate students are
found in Princeton history as early as 1760, when Presi-
dent Davis mentions the fact that five such were 'pursu-
ing studies' in College."179 And again, "There had been
a few students at Princeton pursuing advanced work as
far back as Witherspoon's time. James Madison had
returned for a year to continue his studies under the
great war president."180 "Harvard College, from its
foundation encouraged its alumni to remain in residence
after taking the bachelor's degree, and in 1825 the alumni
of other colleges were invited; but no instruction was
provided for such men, outside the schools of law, medi-
cine, theology, and science."181 Generally, the early
graduate work was under the direction of the general
faculty or some individual professor; later this work
178. Samuel E. Morison, The Development of Harvard Univer-
sity, p. 456.
179. Varnum L. Collins, Princeton, p. 235.
180. Edwin M. Norris, The Story of Princeton, p. 207.
181. Morison, op. cit., p. 452.
106
was under the direction of the professor in charge of a
department; and still later, standing committees were
appointed to supervise such work, or in some cases, the
department assumed full responsibility. In the Ohio
State University, the early history of graduate work
went through five phases, namely: first, it was in charge
of some individual professor; second, it was a depart-
mental responsibility; third, individual colleges took
charge; fourth, in 1902 the Graduate School in the Arts
College was organized; and finally, in 1911, the Graduate
School of the University was established.
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
At Stanford University the professorship was the early
unit of organization in graduate work. There was no
standing committee on advanced degrees until 1898. In
that year a standing committee on the Doctor's degree,
and a year later another committee on the Master's degree
was appointed by the President. In 1900, these two
committees were superseded by a single Committee on
Graduate Study. It is recorded that in April, 1911,
"the Academic Council was unwilling to concede the
advantages of a separately organized Graduate School
and rejected the proposal by a vote of 42 to 18. A sub-
stitute proposition was adopted enlarging the member-
ship of the Graduate Study Committee to eleven, elections
to be without nomination and by secret ballot."182
PRINCETON AND CORNELL
The Graduate Schools were usually established by a
resolution of the Board of Trustees, or by the Regents
of the University. Some of the ordinances for the or-
ganization of the Graduate Schools are stated in general
terms, while others are more specific. Probably the most
singular organization is that of Princeton University
182. Orrin L. Elliott, Stanford University, The First Twenty-Five
Years, p. 172
fl
3
107
(see Appendix C.) Here the organization ordinance is
essentially concerned with the function of the dean and
a Faculty Committee. Ten years later, Cornell Univer-
sity formulated the organization for its Graduate School
(see Appendix D.) This ordinance was more fully con-
cerned with the membership and jurisdiction of the
Graduate Faculty and a General Committee. The dis-
tinctive feature in this organization is "that the faculty
of the Graduate School shall consist of those professors
and assistant professors who are actively engaged in
supervising the work of graduate students." Dean Richt-
myer of Cornell explained to the present writer, that the
graduate student may select today a member in the lower
ranks, even an instructor, to supervise his graduate work.
All those who are thus selected form the Faculty of the
Graduate School. Dean Richtmyer observed with pride:
"We have here a faculty selected by the students." This
is, indeed, a democratic school reminding us of the earliest
universities of Europe.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, WASHINGTON
AND NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITIES
In 1914, the University of Minnesota set forth an or-
ganization scheme with a more detailed outline of the
membership of the Executive Committee of the Graduate
School (see Appendix E.) One of the more complete
ordinances is that of Washington University in St. Louis
(see Appendix F.) It sets forth the exact name of the
school, its objective, responsibility and method of admin-
istration. A Board of Graduate Studies is established
as the responsible body for "the initiation of matters of
educational policy in the School of Graduate Studies."
Its membership and duties are established. Likewise,
the Corporation is to appoint a dean when needed-which
was done during the same year. Northwestern Univer-
sity established its Graduate School in 1910. By univer-
sity statute, the Graduate School administered advanced
non-professional degrees. By university statute, adopted
-
108
in 1933, at least two-thirds of the Faculty of the Graduate
School must be members of faculties of non-professional
schools. Thus each professional school administers its
own professional degrees, and the combined professional
schools have a controlling influence in the administration
of non-professional degrees. In the face of such inadvis-
able practices, the Board of Graduate Studies voted
unanimously on March 6, 1935, to approve a new plan for
the functioning of the Graduate School which was to
correct the former evil (see Appendix G.)
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
In the same year, 1935, the University of Pennsylvania
reorganized its former mode of administration, now in
terms of divisions. This was probably the most revolu-
tionary reorganization in the history of Graduate Schools.
From the writings of George E. Nitzsche, the early
history is summarized as follows: "In 1779 the charter
rights and privileges of the college were absorbed by a
new organization, called in its charter 'The Trustees of
the University of the State of Pennsylvania,' making it
the first institution in the United States to be designated
a university. It was also the first university in fact
in North America, it being the first educational institu-
tion to establish professional schools as distinct from the
College."183
Of course, Mr. Nitzsche's conception of a
University was entirely different from that which is
being maintained in this study (see Chapter I). Never-
theless, Mr. Nitzsche is correct in the use of the word
"designated." "In 1882," continues the same writer,
"Provost Pepper organized the Department of Philoso-
phy." In 1906, Doctor Clarence G. Child presented to the
Board of Trustees a resolution which was passed by the
Faculty of the Department of Philosophy requesting
that the title of the department be changed from "Depart-
183. George E. Nitzsche, Brief Historical Sketch of the University
of Pennsylvania, 1740-1929, as quoted in T. R. Birch, The
First One Hundred Years of the Zeolsophic Literary Society,
(1829-1929), p. 84.
?
i
109
•
ment of Philosophy" to that of a "Graduate School" and
that the change should go into effect on September 1,
1906. The Trustees ordered the adoption of such a
change, and that this Graduate School be administered
by a dean and an educational council.184 During the
subsequent years, the faculty felt the need for bringing
together under one administration all those studies having
similar interests. After much study, many conferences
and reports, Dean Crosby reported on December 16, 1935,
a plan for the reorganization of the Graduate School of
Arts and Sciences. On motion of the Board of Trustees
it was
RESOLVED: That the Board approves the plan of reorgani-
zation of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences recom-
mended by the Educational Council at its meeting on De-
cember 11, 1935.185
This plan and procedure of reorganization is given in
full in Appendix H. The reorganization is based on four
major divisional faculties; namely, the Humanities; the
Physical Sciences; the Biological and Medical Sciences;
and the Social Sciences. These faculties elect three
members each and with the Dean of the Graduate School
form a Council of the Graduate School which performs
such executive functions as are in the general University
interest and those which "shall from time to time be
delegated to it by a majority vote of the divisional
faculties, each faculty voting as a unit." Furthermore,
the Council "shall pass upon all questions submitted to
it by the Executive Committee of the Divisional Faculties
or by the members of those Faculties." Each divisional
faculty has an Executive Committee which consists of the
Dean of the Graduate School, ex-officio, a Chairman of
that Divisional Faculty, acting as chairman, and six
members elected by the Divisional Faculty. It has charge
of all matters pertaining to the entire division. Unity
of administration based on the principle of common
interest is the distinctive feature of the present organ-
184. Minutes of the Board of Trustees, Book 14, p. 449.
185. Minutes of the Board of Trustees, Book 22, p. 241.
110
ization and administration of the University of Penn-
sylvania.
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
The most recent pattern of reorganization was formu-
lated by the Ohio State University, dated August 11,
1938 (see Appendix I). The most noteworthy feature
of this plan is that members of the Graduate Council
are "appointed by the President in consultation with the
Dean for a period of three years and shall, for one year
after the expiration of an appointment, be ineligible for
reappointment." Doctor McPherson, the former Dean
of the Graduate School, explained to the present writer,
that in actual practice the dean's consultation consists of
recommendations made by the faculty who actually elect
the members to this Graduate Council. Other features
of this reorganization plan are that an Executive Board
assists the Dean in the administration of the Graduate
School, and that "the Dean of the Graduate School shall
be appointed by the Board of Trustees upon the recom-
mendation of the President, acting with the advice of
the Graduate Council," and finally that "the Department
is the unit of university organization."
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL AS GENERALLY
ORGANIZED
The Graduate School is usually composed of a Graduate
Council, the faculty, the dean, and such committees as
are deemed expedient.
The Graduate Council usually functions as the adminis-
trative agent for the graduate faculty in carrying on
the activities of the graduate school. The following table
clearly shows the lack of agreement as to the size and
nomenclature of this so-called Graduate Council. Orig-
inally this council was to serve as the dean's cabinet.
This was particularly true in the University of Iowa.
Doctor Seashore, Dean Emeritus of the Graduate College,
75
1.
111
pointed out in 1931,186 and re-emphasized to the present
writer that the trend is definitely toward a graduate
council composed of two types of members; namely, those
that are elected and those that are appointed. The ap-
pointed members are usually ex-officio, while the elected
members are selected by the respective departments or
divisions.
NOMENCLATURE AND NUMBER OF MEMBERS
CONSTITUTING THE SO-CALLED GRADUATE
Institution
Brown University
Catholic University
Clark University
Columbia University
Cornell University
Harvard University
Indiana University
Johns Hopkins University
Northwestern University
Ohio State University
Princeton University
Stanford University
State University of Iowa
University of California
University of Chicago
University of Illinois
University of Kansas
University of Michigan
University of Minnesota
University of Missouri
University of Nebraska
University of N. Carolina
University of Pennsylvania
University of Texas
University of Virgina
University of Wisconsin
Washington University
Yale University
COUNCIL
Nomenclature
Graduate Council
Graduate Council
Graduate Board
Joint Committee on
Graduate Instruction
General Committee
the Graduate School
Administrative Board
Council of Graduate
School
Academic Council
Administrative Board
Graduate Council
Faculty Committee on
Graduate Affairs
Committee on Graduate
Study
Graduate Council
Graduate Council
Administrative Board
Executive Faculty
Administrative Committee
Executive Board
Executive Board
Graduate Council
Administrative Board
Council of Graduate
School
Graduate Council
on
Number of
Members
24
9
16
13
15
4 2
12
27
221
72
12
9
27
18
11
9
24
22
HT
2 40
15
10
8
10
11
13
13
Administrative Committee
7
6
Graduate School Committee
Board of Graduate Studies 11
Board of Permanent
Officers
57
186. Carl E. Seashore, The Graduate College in the State Univer-
sity of Iowa. In, Trends in Graduate Work. University of
Iowa Studies, January 1, 1931.
112
The history of the function of the graduate faculty
has already been developed in connection with some of the
institutions. As early as 1855, according to official
announcements, the faculty at the State University of
Iowa was to be ready to offer graduate work. In the
University Circular for this year we read:
Any student, who has completed the studies embraced in the
nine departments, and shall sustain satisfactory examinations
in each, shall be entitled to receive the highest degree con-
ferred by the University, that is, Doctor of Philosophy.187
However, it was forty-five years after the adoption of
this policy that the first doctorate was granted. Why,
it may be asked, did it take so long when it had been
pointed out earlier that there was a great demand for
this degree? Did this institution have an adequate facul-
ty? The answer is definitely in the negative.
With the establishment of the Graduate School as the
true university idea where research became the very
life of the institution, the graduate faculty consisted of
men dedicated to the task of accomplishing the purposes
for which the graduate schools were brought into being.
The ordinances for the organization of the School of
Graduate Studies of Washington University at St. Louis,
contain probably one of the best statements of the func-
tion of the graduate faculty. It reads:
The principal function of the Graduate Faculty shall be to
discuss the Graduate interests of the University and to
bring changes or innovations with reference to the conduct
of Graduate work.188
Local needs will determine the nature of the problems
which face the graduate faculty. "In most instances,"
observes Walter C. John, Senior Specialist in Higher
Education in the United States Office of Education, "the
graduate faculty is the legislative as well as the teaching
body of the graduate school and has the final authority,
187. Seashore, op. cit., p. 9.
188. See Appendix F.
113
with exception of the trustees, with respect to the grant-
ing of advanced degrees."189 Advanced degrees are the
rewards of satisfactory evidence to carry on independent,
original research. The nursery of this research is the
seminar. Here the faculty and students are no longer in
a teacher-student relationship, but rather as partners
they are co-workers toward a common objective.
189. Walter C. John, Graduate Study in Universities and Colleges
in the United States. Office of Education, Bulletin No. 20,
1934, p. 98.
114
CHAPTER VI
THE SEMINAR
*
PREVIEW
The seminar is the accepted work-shop of the graduate
school. It is the graduate school's nursery of scientific
research. Inasmuch as the seminar consists of a "small
group of advanced students carrying on investigations
of an original nature under the guidance of their in-
structors," it cannot be anything but an advanced tech-
nique, and it can not be employed successfully in any
other part of the educational system except in the gradu-
ate school.
*
*
The seminar is
a real center of the life-giving, the
stimulating, the creative force of the modern university.
Without it no university is complete; with it, correctly
conducted, no university can fail to accomplish the main
purpose of its being.190
The origin of the seminar may be traced to the ecclesi-
astical schools of the Middle Ages. "The Medieval 'semi-
naries' were, as the word implies, veritable seed-plots,
institutions in which the youthful would-be religious
writer or teacher was taught to unfold the seed of
doctrinal disputes, of theological acumen, and of public
eloquence."191 The purpose of the disputation was prac-
tice in the use of knowledge for the solution of con-
190. Edwin R. A. Seligman, Seminar Methods of Economic Insti-
tutions. Journal of Political Economy XX (February, 1912),
p. 154.
191. ibid., p. 154.
115
troversial questions. It was well adapted to increase a
student's alertness, and to develop the art of quickly and
logically defining his own thoughts as well as those of
an opponent, while yet face to face with him. The passing
of the disputation method was directly due to the great
change in the method of science which began in the
sixteenth century. Scientific efforts were and are direct-
ed toward the establishment of facts, and facts are
matters of discovery, not of debate.
THE MODERN SEMINAR IN
GERMAN UNIVERSITIES
The modern seminars are as old as the present organi-
zation of the German universities. Their origin is well
described by Professor Paulsen in these words:
Their origin goes back to the eighteenth century, the century
in which the university passed from the old traditional methods
of instruction to the principles of freedom of research and
teaching. The new humanistic philology formed the start-
ing point of the reform; the seminar established by Gessner
is the oldest; it was still a cross between a seminary for
teachers and a seminar for scholars. Although the seminar
founded by F. A. Wolff was intended to be a pedagogical
seminary, it showed a more pronounced tendency to in-
troduce the student into scientific research. The nineteenth
century has adhered to the method and has extended the
seminar system to all the departments of university instruc-
tion; first to the branches of the philosophical faculty, to
the historical, natural-scientific, mathematical and social
sciences, then it passed into the faculties of theology and
law, to which, moreover, the so-called practica had long been
familiar. The medical faculty has instead of the seminars
the so-called institutes (laboratories) and clinics. It is
worthy to note that the pedagogical seminars, which aimed
to prepare the student to teach in the gymnasia, and which
really represent the starting point of the seminar system,
have gradually separated from the university, and have
become allied with the schools themselves.192
-
The term "seminar" was employed "originally in Ger-
many to denote a group of advanced students in the
universities, directed by professors for the purpose of
investigation or research or of introduction into the
methods of research. It is probable that the use of the
word in this sense was popularized by Francke (1663-
192. Paulsen, op. cit., pp. 212-13.
116
1727) who at the beginning of the eighteenth century
established the Seminarium praeceptorum-a training
school for teachers."193
INTRODUCTION OF SEMINAR INTO
AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES
The seminar was first introduced into this country by
Professor Charles Kendall Adams of the University of
Michigan.194 That the seminar was modelled after the
German idea is definitely described by Professor Adams.
in his own words. He writes:
Ever since my observation of the methods pursued in Europe,
I have desired to introduce into the historical courses of
the University of Michigan something akin to the Historische
Gesellschaft of the German Universities. At the beginning
of the past year a favorable opportunity seemed to present
itself. After consultation with the president of the Univer-
sity, and with the faculty of our department, I met the
members of the senior class and explained the purpose of
the experiment.195
The success of this first experiment was recorded by
the same professor as "most satisfactory." The students'
reaction to this seminar course was also most favorable.
They wrote:
This course, we think, is one of the best offered in the cur-
riculum to those interested in historical study, and that
it is appreciated is evidenced by the fact that the sections
are filled to their utmost capacity.196
The seminar technique spread rapidly through the Uni-
versity of Michigan. In the space of about two years
"seminary work (was) done in History, English Litera-
ture, and particularly in Greek."197 Strong influences
were also exerted by such men as Herbert B. Adams who,
during the early years of his connection with Johns
Hopkins University, labored diligently in introducing the
193 Paul Monroe, Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. 5, p. 322.
194 Herbert B. Adams, The Seminar Method, p. 104.
195. Loc. cit.
196. The Chronicle, University of Michigan Bulletin, October 18,
1879.
197. The Chronicle, University of Michigan Bulletin, October 30,
1880.
;
117
true seminar as an integral part of the University.198
President Gilman spoke of the seminar method in his
early reports and encouraged its adoption. In 1888, the
following announcement appeared in the Johns Hopkins
Circular.
GREEK SEMINAR
Professor Gildersleeve will conduct the Greek Seminary,
the plan of which is based on the continuous study of some
leading author or some special department of literature.
The Seminary consists of the Directors, Fellows, and Scholars,
and such advanced students as shall satisfy the Director
of their fitness for an active participation in the work by
an essay, a critical exercise, or some similar test of attain-
ments and capacity. All graduate students, however, may
have the privilege of attending the course.199
THE PURPOSE AND ESSENTIAL
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SEMINAR
The real raison d'être of the seminar is to "teach the
student how to handle his material and by interpretation
or discovery to make contributions to the store of existing
knowledge."200 Hence the primary object of the seminar
is not to teach facts but to teach the correct methods of
dealing with the raw material from which facts must be
established. Having the facts before us certain inferences
may be deduced. It is then necessary to determine as
accurately as possible the degree of probability which
may be attached to the result. Finally, the conclusions
reached are combined into a systematic and comprehen-
sive whole.
This, in brief, constitutes the nature of the seminar.
"The essential characteristic of the work," says Profes-
sor George B. Adams, !
f
is the practice of these methods by a number of students of
about the same stage of advancement, and the resulting
mutual criticism and stimulus of mind by mind.
Any pro-
cess by which the same results are reached in the individual
student by himself, however effective it may be in scholarly
198. George Burton Adams, Methods of Work in the Historical
Seminars. American Historical Review X (April, 1905),
p. 521.
199. Circular, Johns Hopkins University, No. 67, July, 1888, p. 99.
200. Seligman, op. cit., p. 157.
118
training, is not properly called seminary work. Nor, in
fact, are any of the incidental results-such as a knowledge
of bibliography and the tools of the trade, or the ability
to distinguish among the new books appearing from time
to time, those of real and serious scholarship from those
that have the form but not the substance-valuable as
these may be considered the direct object sought. The real
object of seminar work is the training of the investigator,
and the methods to be considered here are those that have
this for their result and no other.201
Practically every writer without exception stresses the
importance of cooperation as one of the cardinal prin-
ciples of the seminar. Professor Paulsen writes:
The student can be introduced to scientific research only
by the method of cooperation. And that is the real purpose
of the seminar; they are nurseries of scientific research.
In them under the guidance and assistance of a master,
pupils become acquainted with scientific work and learn
how to do it. After apprenticeship they continue to work
themselves as masters and for their part preserve and
improve the methods and train the younger generation in
their use.
The seminars are therefore the essential factors
in preserving the continuity of scientific work.202
Seminars are not to be thought of as substitutes for
class lectures. They are institutions by themselves. They
are the very heart of the university from which contribu-
tions to existing knowledge must necessarily be kindled.
Hence we find that "some seminars have received special
endowment in the form of libraries and laboratories, and
here the professors with their assistants and students
carry on the work of special investigation.”203
The seminar always presupposes on the part of its
members some familiarity with the subject-matter. Hence
only the more advanced students are admitted. Here
the students become personally acquainted with the pro-
fessors and vice versa. Consequently from the viewpoint
of membership, the seminar has a two-fold advantage;
first, there is a decided advantage on the part of the
student, and second, an advantage on the part of the
professor. On the part of the students we must note
first, the creation of ties of friendship between students;
second, increased familiarity with the literature; and
201. George B. Adams, op. cit., p. 522.
202. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 212.
203. Monroe, op. cit., p. 323.
119
third, acquisition of knowledge of the techniques em-
ployed in solving the problem. On the part of the pro-
fessor: "He learns to unbend himself. In the lecture
room he is the sole arbiter, the oracle. He lays down
the law, as he comprehends it. In the seminar he is not
the preceptor but the co-worker. The professor is here
the friend, the equal."204 For he realizes that the dis-
sertation which may evolve out of this seminar is as
much a pride to the professor as to the student.205
METHODS OF CONDUCTING SEMINARS
The method employed in conducting the early seminars
had no iron-clad system of uniformity. The whole object
of the work was to teach the best methods of investiga-
tion. Professor George B. Adams said:
At the time I was at the University of Leipzig, it was a
student tradition that the seminary method of Professor
Wilhelm Arndt,which was of this class, was one which he
had learned in the seminary of Professor George Waitz,
and it reproduced by direct descent through him, Ranke's
original seminary method. 206
An actual seminar meeting conducted by Professor
Arndt is described in The Nation by Professor Preston.
Briefly it stated that in Professor Arndt's work "topics
were almost never assigned to individuals. Some one or
two became responsible for the translation of the passage
to be taken up each evening, but the discussion was always
general. Every student was at any moment liable to be
called upon for his opinion. Questions and suggestions
came as freely from students as instructors."207
A second method of the early seminar method is de-
scribed by Paulsen in the following manner:
In general, the method followed is this: scientific investiga-
tions of limited extent are assigned to the members and
conducted under the guidance of the instructor.
The pro-
fessor of philology, of history, of political economy, gives
out a problem which the student is able to solve with the
204. Seligman, op. cit., p. 159.
205. Paulsen, op. cit., p. 214.
206. Adams, George B., op. cit., p. 524.
207. Preston, Historical Seminar Methods at Leipzig, The Nation,
49 (September 26, 1889), p. 252.
120
helps and authorities at command; he designates the ma-
terial, and then lets the student find his own way to the
solution. The essay, when handed in, is submitted to one
or more of the student's colleagues for criticism and report,
and finally discussed at a general meeting of the seminar
under the guidance of the director.208
Professor George B. Adams describes in detail209 three
methods of conducting the seminar. These may be sum-
marized as: first, the analytical method, in which the
work consists primarily in the minute scrutiny and com-
parison of a small body of closely-related material, or
even of a single document. This is the typical method
that Professor Arndt employed at the University of
Leipzig. Second, the comparison and combination meth-
od, in which a group of connected sources of consider-
able extent or a single one like a chronicle, is made the
foundation of a series of studies. Third, the essay type,
in which the work is done in essays on assigned topics
prepared by members of the seminar. A typical case of
this last method is the presentation of reports on doctor's
dissertations for criticism and suggestions by the seminar.
In late years, the term seminar has been given a num-
ber of different connotations. In the University of Cin-
cinnati, for example, the term seminar is applied to
group discussions in which "students and faculty sit
around tables arranged in a hollow square with seats for
forty persons. Informality has been the rule, with ques-
tions frequently directed from one member of the group
to another rather than to the chairman, and with much
interchange of opinion between students and the partici-
pating faculty." 210 The crux of this seminar is not
criticism but rather "discussion, problems solved, papers
submitted and comprehensive examinations."
In 1927, an article appeared under the title, "Seminars
in the High School, Why Not?" in which the writer argued
for the introduction of the true seminar into the high
school. He stated:
208. Perry, op. cit., p. 158.
209. George Burton Adams, op. cit., p. 522.
210. Louis A. Pechstein, Cincinnati Seminar Plan, School and
Society 41 (June 1, 1935), p. 737.
121
Its object would be to provide each individual with a thread
of knowledge appealing to his personal interest and ambi-
tions, by association with which dryer facts necessary to
scholastic advance and progressive citizenship would be
preserved.211
The advantage claimed was that:
Such a plan, like others of the sort, possesses the advantage
of a broader latitude for the students than is allowed in
text book instruction, and of placing him squarely in the
center of the school work. He is taught to help himself,
and his self-confidence is built collaterally with initiative.212
This lowering of the seminar to the high school level
is most absurd in light of Professor Seligman's statement
as early as in 1912, that "a university is an honored in-
stitution; but when we dub every little second rate college
or female seminary a university, we are degrading the
title. So in the same way the seminar. The seminar is
a strictly university method. When an attempt is made
to introduce these methods into a college, the academy,
the high school, not only is it an abuse which will be
utterly useless or worse than useless to the student, but
one which will tend to cast discredit on the idea itself.
The reason is obvious: the seminar is an adjunct to
specialization."213
The present writer, while visiting various universities,
had an opportunity to observe a number of so-called
seminars. It was soon discovered that there are today
about as many notions of seminars as there are instruc-
tors. In some cases, the seminar consisted of nothing
more than a small group of students, largely due to the
small registration in the course and not because of the
nature of the work, sitting around a table, headed by the
instructor who delivered a prepared lecture from his
notes, without as much as a single comment on the part
of the students. In another case, the instructor informed
the writer that the main difference in his seminar from
that of a regular class lecture course was the question of
informality. The student would discuss with the instruc-
211. C. C. Sellers, Seminars in High School, Why Not? Educa-
tional Review, 74 (December, 1927), p. 284.
212. Sellers, op. cit., p. 285.
213. Seligman, op. cit., p. 156. (Italics by present writer.)
122
tor some vital issues pertaining to a given problem. And
so it was. At Cornell University, it is the custom "to
translate the German word 'seminar' into the English
equivalent, seminary. Here a limited number of advanced
students, eight being as large a number as is usually
permitted, take up the study at first hand of some sub-
ject, each taking a special phase, and reporting in his
turn, his report being criticized by his colleagues and the
professor, who sits as moderator."214 Another seminar
observed was very similar to that described in the Uni-
versity of Cincinnati.
In a mid-western university, the professor conducts a
seminar by "inviting" certain advanced students-seven
or eight in number-who are interested in school adminis-
tration to meet with the several faculty members
for about three hours to consider a vital topic
selected by someone in the group. The primary purpose
here is to discover first, a vital problem which needs a
solution and the solution of which will prove to be a
contribution to existing knowledge; and second, to formu-
late a technique for the same. Here, the faculty instruc-
tors and students meet informally, place themselves on
the same level and work cooperatively, criticizing and
offering suggestions. All the elements of a true seminar
are at full play, with a friendly spirit prevailing.
DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF
THE SEMINAR
What, then is a seminar? One well-experienced profes-
sor facetiously but nevertheless with some implied truth
replied: "It is a university course which the students
give, and the professor takes." President Atwood of
Clark University, would think of the seminar, and in
fact of the entire university, as "a work shop where every
facility that can possibly be provided is available for the
faculty and students in the pursuit of their research
▼
214. H. C. Howe, Graduate Study at Cornell. University of
Oregon Monthly VI, No. 8 (May, 1902), p. 247.
123
work." "We hold the belief," continued President At-
wood, "that Charles W. Eliot is correct in his statement
that 'the very best kind of education is obtained in doing
things one's self under competent direction and with
good guidance.' "215
In addition to the statements already made as to the
meaning of the seminar, the following are helpful:
Professor Charles K. Adams of the University of
Michigan:
an
A Seminar according to the German idea, is a small group
of advanced students carrying on investigations of
original nature under the guidance of their instructors.216
Professor Edwin Seligman of Columbia University:
The seminar may be defined as an assemblage of teacher
with a number of selected advanced students where methods
of original research are expounded, where the creative
faculty is trained and where the spirit of scientific indepen-
dence is indicated.217
Professor James M. Hughes of Northwestern Univer-
sity:
The seminar is a means of creating a situation so that
students are challenged to do advanced thinking in their
specialized interests.218
The aim of the seminar should be to enable the
of scientific research. Its aim should be to enable the
individual student, at first under the guidance of his
own professor, and then on his own initiative:
1. To discover the existing literature in his major
subject, including important older monographs and
editions, as well as the current journals.
2. To broaden his acquaintance with his subject by
continuous reading, observation, and reflection.
3. To be able to trace and estimate the evidence re-
garding particular problems.
4. To master the methods of exact research, to make
them his own, and be able to apply them.
215. Stated by President Wallace W. Atwood to the present
writer, December 28, 1938.
216. Charles K. Adams, as quoted in Paul Monroe's Cyclopedia
of Education, Vol. 5, p. 323. "Seminar."
217. Seligman, op. cit., p. 154.
218. Dictated to the present writer in a private interview with
Doctor James Monroe Hughes, Northwestern University.
124
5.
To submit his conclusions to the acid test of rigor-
ous criticism.
6. To perceive the relation which each investigation
pursued bears to the whole subject of which that
investigation forms a part.
7. To recognize, distinguish and isolate the real issues
in a question, and to perceive where the discovery
of the unknown truth is possible.
8. To afford younger men an actual meaningful op-
portunity of seeing the methods by which experi-
enced men and scholars contribute to existing
knowledge.
CRITERION OF A SUCCESSFUL SEMINAR
The test of a successful seminar is to criticize severely
the problem presented. While attending a former insti-
tution of higher learning, the writer recalls the seminars
which may be viewed as a group of "vultures" coming in
to tear the speaker to pieces. The over-anxiousness of
some members to ask questions was very obvious. Fre-
quently, the speaker was not given a fair chance to
express himself fully without a battery of further ques-
tions "being shot" at him. The acid tests of a good semi-
nar were adequately described by Professor George B.
Adams. He said: "If the criticism tears the essay com-
pletely to pieces, brings out its methods of collection,
comparison, and combination, exposes the faults or merits
of method in these processes, and of order, perspective,
and formulation in the final result, then it is accomplish-
ing fully the work intended."219
The value of the seminar is implied in the expression
that it is "the Graduate School nursery of scientific re-
search." While the value of the critical training offered
in the seminar is not always immediately apparent to the
student, there can be little doubt that such a learning
situation is difficult for the novice. The ultimate result,
219. George B. Adams, op. cit., p. 530.
3
के
125
1
however, which brings about a definite contribution to
existing knowledge is finally viewed with pride by both
students and faculty as a worthwhile situation which
brings lasting satisfaction.
In conclusion, the following desirable principles of a
successful seminar may be set up.
1. The seminar should develop original research.
2. It should imply equality between student and
faculty.
3. It should adopt the use of the cooperative method.
4. It should involve the employment of the most
advanced research methods.
5. It should offer criticism which must be adequate
and searching.
6. It should furnish an opportunity for the one
reporting to develop leadership by making him
the master of the situation.
7. It should give opportunity to defend the report
from the attacks of adversaries, meeting them
face to face.
J
126
}
CHAPTER VII
ADMINISTRATORS OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOLS
AND THEIR MAJOR PROBLEMS
*
*
PREVIEW
The graduate dean's office is the integrating head-
quarters for all research workers. While the graduate
dean is the guiding influence for productive scholar-
ship in his institution yet his functions are not inquisitor-
ial but cooperative and strategic. The graduate dean
must be a highly qualified individual so as to cope with
the ever changing problems of the scholar and research
worker.
*
*
The importance of the graduate faculty has been
stressed throughout this study. There can be no question,
and we may accept it as a truism, that distinguished
teachers and scholars will make any school great in the
eyes of the world. However, the real beauty of univer-
sity scholarship lies within the institution. In no other
place of educational life does so much depend upon a
thorough administrative management as upon the leader
of the Graduate School.
To describe an ideal Dean of the Graduate School would
be to give expression to the best hopes of the mind in
superlative terms. It is not that the Graduate Dean must
be able to mount the ladder of scholastic perfection higher
than all those who are his companions in the school, nor
that he should be a walking encyclopedia, or some other
127
form of baffling phenomenon which one sees occasionally
in this world. He is rather one who may be earmarked
first, by his unrelenting enthusiasm for truth; second,
by his love of knowledge; and third, by his desire, zeal,
and devotion with which he guides accomplished and
prospective scholars in their rugged determination to
succeed in the discovery of truth. Undoubtedly this is
what President Gilman meant when he said in his Seventh
Annual Report: "The character, aim, and influence of
the university foundation must be discovered in the con-
duct and utterances of those who administer its affairs,
and by its results in a course of years." "The deanship
of the graduate school," is, then, according to Dean
Seashore, "a most coveted job in the university because
it has represented the largest opportunity of leadership
in the promotion of research, freedom for educational
experimentation, relative freedom from budgetary and
disciplinary problems, the privilege of comradeship with
the most enterprising professors and students in the
university, and professional association with national and
international investigators in all fields."220
BASIS FOR SELECTING GRADUATE DEANS
Why are these men selected for the position of the
deanship in the graduate schools? Certainly not because
of the primary interest in their specialty, but rather be-
cause, in addition to their renown as outstanding scholars
in their respective fields of specialization, they are able
to see the importance of true research in a larger re-
lationship than merely in their own particular scholarly
interest. They can view scholarship from the broad
view of the welfare of the university and science as a
whole and have given some evidence in knowing how to
deal with both instructors and students. This is fur-
ther made clear when it is known that many of these
graduate deans have served as Presidents of Universities.
220. Carl E. Seashore, An Open Letter to the Graduate Dean.
The Journal of Higher Education (January, 1939), pp. 1-2.
\
128
To mention a few, we have the famous historian, Presi-
dent Ford of the University of Minnesota, who was the
Graduate Dean before his recent appointment to succeed
Doctor Lotus Coffman. There is also the noted chemist
and Graduate Dean Doctor William McPherson, now the
acting President of the State University of Ohio. Many
of the other graduate deans have served from time to
time as the acting presidents of their respective univer-
sities.
The graduate dean is appointed by the Board of Trus-
tees on the recommendation of the president of the uni-
versity who usually offers at the same time the opinion
of the graduate faculty.221 Among other instances, the
detailed report of the former Dean Merritt of Cornell
University may be cited to illustrate the democratic pro-
cedure in deciding upon the dean. At the meeting of the
faculty at Cornell University, held on January 23, 1914,
the following communication was received from the
Board of Trustees:
On recommendation of the President, the Faculty of the
Graduate School is requested to recommend a Dean of the
Graduate School for a term of three years, to succeed Dean
Merritt, resigned.222
The faculty then voted "that the General Committee
be requested to present to the faculty a nomination or
nominations for the office of Dean." Of this procedure,
Dean Merritt wrote:
While the faculty has not given expression in any formal
way to its opinion on the plan now used for the first time
in the selection of its dean, my impression is that the plan
has received almost universal approval. Personally, I am
a firm believer in the correctness of the principles involved
in the two essential features of the new plan, namely,
nomination by the faculty, and election for a definite term.223
The definite term of office has not been carried out
but while it is usually so understood, actual practice at
221. See also the discussion of how the dean is elected in the
Catholic University and other institutions discussed in an
earlier chapter.
222. Report of the President of Cornell University, 1913-14,
Ithaca, 1914, p. xvi.
223. Report of the Dean of the Graduate School. In the Report
of the President of Cornell University, 1913-14.
129
T
Cornell as well as in other universities shows that the
graduate dean once appointed remains in office at the
pleasure of the Board of Trustees. No time element is
mentioned in any of the organization plans presented in
the Appendix. The advantage for the selection of a grad-
uate dean by the faculty is best described by Dean Merritt
in the following words:
We may hope through faculty organization to facilitate the
interchange of view regarding graduate work, and to obtain
the benefits of cooperation or "team work"; and this result
will be best accomplished, in my opinion, by the adoption
of a democratic form of organization.224
DUTIES OF THE GRADUATE DEAN
The duties of the graduate dean are usually not speci-
fied in detail in the greater majority of the reports which
provide for the organization of the graduate schools.
For example, in the plans presented in the Appendix, no
mention is made of the functions of the dean in the
organization of the schools at Cornell, nor in the reor-
ganization plan of the University of Pennsylvania. Since
the organization of the graduate school at Princeton
is centered primarily about the dean, the greater part
of that organization plan is concerned with the dean and
his work. Likewise, the new plan at the Ohio State
University is primarily concerned with the work of the
dean. But even in these latter cases, the duties are all
inclusive in such general language as:
The Dean shall be the administrative head of the Graduate
School with the same general powers, duties and privileges
that pertain to the office of Dean in the several colleges.225
(The Graduate Dean) shall supervise and direct the work
of said school, subject to the control of the Corporation,
and shall perform generally such duties as usually devolve
upon the University, preside at the meetings of the Facul-
ty.226
A summary statement of the duties of the graduate
224. Loc. cit.
225. See Appendix I, for Reorganization Plan of Ohio State Uni-
versity Graduate School.
226. See Appendix F, Ordinance for the Organization of the
School of Graduate Studies of Washington University.
130
dean which have been usually described in the plans of
organization and university by-laws are, namely, that he is
1.
2.
3.
4.
ગ
5.
6.
Responsible to the President of the University.
The administrative head of the graduate school.
Responsible for the conduct of the graduate school.
Responsible for the oversight of admissions of gradu-
ate students.
7.
Expected to present business for faculty action.
8. Required to make annual report to the President of
conditions and progress of the graduate school.
9.
Responsible for the oversight of the academic progress
of graduate students. (At Princeton, the dean also
exercises oversight of the social welfare of the gradu-
ate students.)
The presiding officer at faculty meetings in the ab-
sence of the President.
Required to supply the President and Trustees with
information concerning the graduate school as may be
requested.
Expected to consult the President of the University
on all matters of importance affecting the graduate
school and shall submit all such proposed measures
to the President and Trustees for their approval.
One of the duties of a graduate dean is to render "an
account of his stewardship." Practically all deans do
render such a report, varying in length from the very
brief to the very lengthy. One important graduate
school is very negligible in this respect. No reports have
ever been made by the graduate dean of this school. It
should be done. Several institutions did not publish a
report during the recent depression years.
But what is the nature of these reports? Many of
them are statistical in nature. One mid-western univer-
sity dean of the graduate school observed to the writer:
"You are the first one to ask me for the dean's reports.
Judging from the calls made for these reports, it seems
to be a waste of money to publish them." Are reports
to be abandoned? Most emphatically, no. It is not the
reporting which seems almost meaningless, but it is the
content of the report which should be made more signif-
icant. Dean Gale of the University of Chicago pointed
out what a report of the graduate dean should be. He
wrote:
10.
The purpose of a Dean's report is not so much to furnish
statistics of students registered or degrees taken as to in-
A
131
dicate in summary the conditions of the schools, to point
out the lines along which progress has been made, to men-
tion obvious weaknesses in general organization or special
departmental methods, and to formulate plans that might
effect substantial improvements in standards and so result
in the production of graduates better trained for particular
careers than they now are.227
PROBLEMS OF THE GRADUATE DEAN
In studying the Journal of Proceedings and Addresses
of the Association of American Universities, as well as
the Reports of Presidents in the various universities, it
becomes quite evident that the Graduate School is faced
with the one big issue, namely, the best manner of carry-
ing out the purposes of the Graduate Schools. This may
seem a somewhat trite statement. The fact remains,
that one can hardly go through any of these journals
without encountering the problems of the improvement
of graduate work, the conditions for granting the Master
and Doctor degrees, the selection and guidance of gradu-
ate students, the purpose and meaning of research, and
other problems centered about the research element.
There seems to be no such thing as a best procedure
for carrying on graduate work. No one type of organiza-
tion and administration is best for all. The accepting of
any one pattern as perfection would denote stagnation.
It would be more accurate to use the participial expres-
sion of arriving at a better procedure, rather than the
verb, arrived. There are always problems. But what is
the major concern of the graduate dean in the adminis-
tration of his school? This question was discussed by
the present writer with the deans or presidents of the
universities in every institution visited. It is regrettable
that some of the deans and presidents were not available
at the time when the institutional visit was made. How-
ever, a sufficient number of statements were secured to
show the nature of the problems facing the graduate
227. Henry G. Gale, Report of the Dean of the Ogden Graduate
School of Science, Report of the President, University of
Chicago, July 1, 1929 to June 30, 1930, p. 3.
132
deans.
The following statements were written down
either in the immediate presence of the deans or immedi-
ately after leaving their offices. The phraseology used
is that of the present writer. However, the statements
as here given were submitted to the respective deans for
their approval. Three deans did not wish to be quoted
for the reason that any brief statement would not do
justice to the ideas expressed in the interviews.
COLUMBIA:
Since the graduate school exists for a definite
purpose, the greatest problem of the graduate dean is to
see to it that the school is so operating as to be of the
greatest service to men and scholars. It is a problem of
constant improvement of instructional methods and apply.
ing the spirit of self-guidance. (Dean Pegram)
PRINCETON: Rules and Regulations are apt to limit the able
and unduly encourage the mediocre. In graduate work,
as in many other human activities, "the letter killeth,
but the spirit giveth life.” The dean's work is to keep
this spirit alive. We have generally, throughout the
country, placed too much emphasis upon the extent of
undergraduate preparation and not upon the nature of
quality of this preparation. A sound undergraduate prepara-
tion is a sine qua non requisite for better graduate work.
Watch this undergraduate preparation. (Dean Eisenhart)
CORNELL:
The two most pressing problems facing any
graduate school are: 1st. the securing and retaining of
an adequate, even inspiring faculty; and 2nd. the pro-
viding of that faculty with time and funds for carrying
on research. Graduate work involves much more intimate
contacts between student and professor than does under-
graduate work. In order to communicate to the student
the ideals of scholarship and advanced work of all kinds
the teacher himself must be a productive scholar. If he
attempts merely to 'teach out of a book,' his teaching
will fall far short of what is desirable. But professors,
however capable and interested they may be in carrying
on research, cannot do So unless they have adequate
opportunities, and real men cannot be attracted to
faculty unless such opportunities are available. In short,
these two problems are really one problem, namely, that
of providing adequate facilities for research. (Dean
Richtmyer)
a
WASHINGTON:
Today, the greatest need of the higher and
highest education is that emphasis be shifted from quantity
to quality in the enrollment of students and the evalu-
ation of schools. This is possible only by greater strict-
ness in the selection and examination of candidates for
advanced degrees. Since to them is entrusted the training
of future teachers, they must be impressed with the
dignity and intrinsic value of their own degrees in order
to pass on the tradition and evaluate the position of the
teacher. In this respect, and alas, not in this respect
;
**
3
!
133
alone, the Association of American Universities has been
a pronounced failure. (Dean Emeritus Heller)
CHICAGO: The Graduate Schools are becoming more and
more important. In fact, the Graduate School is the most
important unit in a university, and universities will be
accredited and receive recognition on the quality of the
research carried on in the Graduate School. To improve
the quality of the research product is the ever challenging
problem. (Dean Emeritus Laing)
The Graduate School is becoming more important. Re-
search Institutes will increase and be connected with or
be part of the Graduate School. University research men
can then devote more time to their researches and have
the facilities to do so, at the same time they can keep in
touch with graduate students. To balance research and
teaching is the major problem of the graduate dean.
(Dean Gale)
A present tendency of most graduate schools is to turn
out Ph.D.'s who are trained so narrowly that they lack
an adequate background, and as a result, they fail to
understand the relationship of their own subject matter
field with related fields. More often than not, those
entering industry or government service need to be re-
educated by their employers before they are in a position
to render effective service. To some extent the same
type of deficiency in education exists for those entering
teaching as a profession. (Doctor Floyd Reeves)
PENNSYLVANIA: The first function of the Graduate School
is to teach, but there is no graduate teaching apart from
research. This is where the seminar is of vital importance.
The improvement of the seminar is the challenging prob-
lem today. Here is where the faculty and students be-
come research-conscious. Here is the place from which
better dissertations should emanate, resulting in more
lasting contributions to society. (Dean Williams)
MISSOURI: We have today too many and cheapened Ph.D.'s.
Many, perhaps most of the dissertations that come to our
hands are such only in name. The problem is to main-
tain higher standards. (Dean Emeritus Miller)
OHIO STATE: There is an imperative need for the establish-
ment and maintaining of high standards. There is also
need for a more rigid selection of graduate students.
Administrative ways and means should be created so that
a graduate student may, in the main, assume responsibility
for his own program. Generally, the basic principle that
the graduate student should be free to elect and not be
assigned must be observed. (Dean Arps)
It is my judgment that the Graduate Council is far super-
ior to the Graduate Faculty in matters of administration
of graduate work. (Acting President McPherson)
In the following four institutions, the problems and
work of graduate deans were supplied by some other
134
officer of the university, such as the University Examiner,
the Assistant Dean, or the Dean of the Liberal Arts
College. Dean Stouffer of the University of Kansas
referred the writer to the Dean of the Liberal Arts with
the statement: "Ask the Dean to tell you my problems
as they are revealed in my every day actions." The ob-
servation of a dean's activities is undoubtedly one of the
best procedures in determining the philosophy and prob-
lems of the graduate dean. The statements supplied by
administrators other than the graduate dean are:
The Graduate Dean stands for a very strong under-
graduate preparation in the field in which the student
desires to do his graduate work. He accepts no correspond-
ence work for graduate credit, and allows only five hours
of "C" grade in the undergraduate record. He requires
more graduate residence work from students who did
undergraduate work in institutions that are lax in their
standards.
KANSAS:
WISCONSIN: The Graduate dean is concerned with three
coordinating research, (2) safeguarding
research funds, and (3) improvement of research. He
sees that productive results are obtained.
problems: (1)
ILLINOIS: The Graduate Dean is constantly working with
these problems: finding promising students; what is the
faculty member doing-who is really doing promising
research; and sifting graduate school offerings. He is
concerned with the question: Are graduate school offer-
ings fit for graduate students?
MICHIGAN: The chief problems with which the dean is con-
cerned are: 1st, maintaining a proper graduate faculty
and students, and 2nd, maintaining research standards.
To make this picture more satisfactory, letters were
sent to the graduate deans in the other universities for
a brief statement concerning their problems. Replies from
the following were received in time to be incorporated in
this study. They are:
HARVARD: The principal problems that have been debated in
recent years have been the requirements for admission,
which we have raised in an endeavor to improve the
quality of students admitted, and requirements for the
Master's degree, which have also been raised in a number
of Departments. Our practice is still not uniform through-
out the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Some departments
grant the Master's degree on the completion of an ap-
proved program of four courses (full work for a year)
135
with honor grades, but in something like half the Depart-
ments, higher standards are set by the requirement
of specific seminar work or by a qualifying examination
of a general character. (Dean George H. Chase)
BROWN: Brown University feels that it has a mission to do
graduate work of a high order in a few departments. Our
numbers are limited to 300 and each year there are ten
times as many people applying as we can take on.
We
do not ordinarily accept persons except from the upper
third of their undergraduate classes and most of them
are from the upper tenth.
Our Graduate School is not primarily a service depart-
ment, but a place for training research workers. How-
ever, we do take on a few local persons for training in
Education, Theology, et cetera, but this is a small fraction
of our work.
Since our numbers are small and our student body homo-
geneous and our aims pretty well fixed, organization is
simple. The school has a separate registrar and the
graduate dean gives part of his time to the work as dean.
This work involves advising with regard to major ap-
pointments on the faculty, helping the departments to
establish and maintain proper graduate instruction, ad-
vising the registrar in regard to special problems of ad-
mission, representing the university in various national
and international matters, helping select fellows, scholars
and assistants. (Dean R. G. D. Richardson)
These statements may resolve themselves down to the
following problems of the graduate schools: namely, the
improvement of the quality of students admitted to the
graduate school; improvement and maintaining high
standards for the Master's and Doctor's degrees; en-
couraging better faculty and student research; insistance
upon a strong undergraduate preparation as the best
means for better graduate work; and better teaching
methods. There is not a single graduate dean that would
not subscribe to any one or all of these statements.
Everyone with whom an interview was carried on, and
some of them were quite lengthy, stressed the importance
of placing less emphasis in the graduate school upon
quantity and pleaded for a greater emphasis upon quality
-quality in the faculty, quality in the students, and
quality in research.
Coordination and articulation are problems and duties
of the administrative corps of a graduate school. This
must be accomplished in such a way that no pseudo-
136
unanimity under a deceptive central control exists.
highly centralized control which endeavors to stereotype
all departments into one pattern is the very antithesis
of research. More than once did the writer hear deans
remark: We have here but one rule, and that is, to break
all rules when research is at stake. President Atwood,
of Clark University, remarked: "The administrative
routine of the Graduate School at Clark University is
reduced to a minimum. We work together as a society
of scholars in which there are very intimate personal
relationships between the various members of the staff
and the students who have been accepted for admission
to candidacy for higher degrees."228 Flexibility of admi-
nistrative rule is the ever gentle guiding principle of
the scholar and research worker.
A
228. Statement of President Atwood made to the present writer,
December 28, 1938.
4
137
CHAPTER VIII
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
STATEMENT AND IMPORTANCE
OF PROBLEM
The history of the origin of the graduate school and
the development of its administration have never been
recorded. This study has endeavored to supply the need
for an accurate understanding of the origin and develop-
ment of the graduate school as an organized integral
unit of the university.
In the post-Civil War reconstruction period, expansion
was the general key-word in American life. Industries
expanded, the transportation system was expanded, new
attitudes and new ideas were incorporated into public
life and into the educational life of the people. It is
significant indeed, that the first real American univer-
sity was established in 1876-a year usually referred
to in American history as the close of the reconstruction
period of the Civil War. It was also the year when the
American people were celebrating the centennial anniver-
sary of their political freedom. In that memorable year
of 1876, Johns Hopkins University opened its doors for
the first time, thereby offering a new educational life
to American scholars. Once the public realized the
importance of a real university, an increased demand was
made for university opportunities. Approximately a half
century elapsed before all the major universities in the
country incorporated the basic ideas and principles which
entered into the organization known as the graduate
school.
The American term "the graduate school" was synon-
ymous with the German expression, "the university."
C
1
138
In order to unfold the history of the ideas that entered
into the establishment of the graduate school, it was
imperative to review the development of the university
idea which had its inception with the beginning of the
medieval universities of Salerno, Bologna, and Paris.
EUROPEAN BACKGROUND
The term "university" came to us from the Latin word
universitas, meaning totality. As used in the fourteenth
century, it meant a corporation or society of students
and masters-universitas magistrorum et discipulorum.
In the early history of the universities of Salerno, Bologna,
and Paris, the first important university principle was
established, namely: the faculty and students serve as
the sine qua non requisite of a university. Another prin-
ciple became apparent, that is, honors and privileges
were accorded by imperial or papal sanctions. These
honors were bestowed upon those who withstood the
attacks of their adversaries in the formal "disputatio"
which was the final test of their scholarship.
In all probability the medieval university would not
be able to meet the requirements of some of our present-
day accrediting agencies. The early medieval university
had no endowments, museums, or laboratories as we
think of them today; nor did the medieval university have
a board of trustees, college catalogues, or organized extra-
curricular activities. Nevertheless, the medieval uni-
versity was the very root of our modern university.
These early European universities were organized into
four faculties, namely, those of medicine, law, theology,
and the arts. By the sixteenth century, the facultas
artium became known as the philosophical faculty, and
the title of magister was replaced in the higher faculties
by the more dignified title of doctor. The title Magister
Artium, however, has remained as an advanced degree
down to the present day.
Since it was the primary function of the administration
in these early universities to maintain and safeguard
•
139
existing knowledge, there was little experimentation
carried on within these universities for the purpose of
discovering new knowledge. Attempts were made to
provide proof for the veracity of the authoritative dicta
of the instructors, and not for the discovery of new
truths. This latter objective was the function of agencies
apart from the university, which eventually became known
as "learned societies." However, in the middle of the
seventeenth century, unification of all learning, experi-
mentation, and research for truth became the common
practice in the German lands, and during the eighteenth
century a definite organization of unified learning and
experimentation revealed itself.
By the end of the eighteenth century, it became a com-
mon practice for the sovereign of German lands to be
the patron of the university. In his official relationship
with the university, the sovereign was known as the
Rektor. The actual work, however, of administering the
internal affairs of the university was in the hands of
the Prorektor, who was selected from among the profes-
sors for a period of one year. The Prorektor was also
chairman of an academic senate which had the respon-
sibility of formulating the policies of the university.
Instruction was in the hands of a faculty and a dean,
assisted by honorary professors and instructors. There
were two types of students, the full-fledged matriculated
students and those who were guests of the university.
These early European universities established the basic
ideas which were later adopted in America by the so-
called graduate schools. These basic ideas were:
1. The university est universitas magistrorum et dis-
cipulorum.
2. The original arts faculty which later became known
as the philosophical faculty is the learned faculty.
3. The seminar is the official workshop for the dis-
covery of new truths.
4. The full professors and the dean constitute the
faculty.
140
5. In order to increase existing knowledge the profes-
sors must enjoy untrammeled freedom, and at the
same time full fledged matriculated students must
enjoy full freedom in the selection of their studies.
THE AMERICAN MISSIONARY PERIOD
OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
It has been said that when our American forefathers
came to this country they left behind them everything
that was near and dear to them. They did, however,
bring ideas, likes and dislikes-attributes which served
as the backbone of our American educational structure.
It is of paramount importance that we recognize the fact
that our forefathers came to this country for definite
reasons. On arriving in this country they were forced
by necessity to modify their ideas to conform with ex-
isting conditions. It was observed that the aristocratic
educational institutions of England were transplanted
by our forefathers to New England in a democratic
setting. From the very beginning, Harvard usurped a
royal prerogative, granting honors and degrees by tacit
consent of the people of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
This practice of granting degrees and determining its
own standards was the common practice of every college
in America. From the time of the Revolutionary War
to the Civil War in the eighteen-sixties little advance
was made in the development of higher education, except
that of popularizing college education. This same period
of time may be regarded better as an educational mis-
sionary period because it was during these years that
the American people were slowly becoming conscious of
the progress made by European universities and scholars.
French influence aided the cause of democratic collegiate
organization in Virginia. This was in no small measure
due to the educational interests of Thomas Jefferson.
Likewise the University of Michigan was first modelled
after Napoleon's University of France. The third
European influence was noticeable in America, when
•
141
American scholars were attracted to the German univer-
sities. They returned and tried to reproduce the German
Strengwissenschaftlische Methode in American institu-
tions of higher learning. Among others, President Tap-
pan of the University of Michigan was one of the most
enthusiastic champions of the German ideas. There can
be little doubt that the American people were perfectly
willing to accept and act upon European ideas provided
that in doing so no dictatorial practices were employed.
President Tappan was criticized and ridiculed for his
persistent advocacy of the German ideal. Nevertheless,
he did play a very important role in the missionary period
of American higher education by educating the American
people to the principles which later became the basis of
the graduate school. With an increasing number of
American scholars being attracted to European univer-
sities, Daniel Coit Gilman pleaded that our students be
given an opportunity for advanced study and research.
He showed the existence of a demand for scientific train-
ing and the positive lack of advanced educational oppor-
tunities in this country.
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY,
THE FIRST "GRADUATE SCHOOL"
In 1876, Johns Hopkins University was founded to sup-
ply the dire need for an institution of higher learning. The
Board of Trustees of this University proceeded slowly
and carefully in formulating sound principles and policies
of organization. In fact, Daniel Coit Gilman, the first
president, proceeded so judiciously that little change was
made necessary by his successors. The founding of this
University was the result of a careful study and obser-
vation at first hand of the various types of organization
and administration found in European universities and
in American colleges.
In conformity with the basic principle that a university
is a society of scholars and that this society must operate
in a democracy, university control was placed chiefly in
142
the hands of the faculty, which was organized as a faculty
of philosophy. The general clearing house was the
Academic Senate which guided the various departments
of study, selected fellows, and acted upon matters brought
to its attention. Later, a Board of University Studies
was created by the Academic Council to take charge, of
arrangements for the instruction of advanced students
and the examinations for higher degrees. There was
no graduate school and no graduate dean specifically
designated as such. Each department, having a chairman
was autonomous. Throughout, a lack of administrative
prescription was more noticeable than the functioning
of a positive administrative machinery. These were the
major contributions which Johns Hopkins offered to
American higher education and which served in a large
measure as precedents for the development of the gradu-
ate school in other American universities.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADUATE
SCHOOL SINCE THE FOUNDING
OF JOHNS HOPKINS
The principles which underlie the work of Johns Hop-
kins were eventually adopted by other universities which
were already in existence, at least in name. When these
nominal universities realized the importance of the func-
tions of Johns Hopkins, and that these functions were dis-
tinct from what was the common practice in their univer-
sities, graduate work was gradually introduced into their
organizations. It soon became apparent, however, that
unorganized graduate work did not command the high
repute that it deserved. Hence a separate, distinct, sys-
tematic organization, known as the graduate school was
brought into being as an integral part of university life.
By a graduate school was meant that organized educa-
tional unit in a university which is devoted to the ac-
quiring, preserving, and disseminating of advanced know-
ledge, distinguished from other eduactional organizations
را
14
:
143
[
by its emphasis upon the advancement of knowledge
through research, its evaluation, and application.
Approximately a half century passed from the founding
of Johns Hopkins in 1876 to the organization of the
Graduate School in Brown University in 1927. This
half century may be called the formative period in the
history of the graduate school in the United States of
America. It was during this formative period that grad-
uate work, which existed in the earlier years as the prod-
uct of individual faculty members, became in most
instances an organized capstone of the undergraduate
departments. The significant feature of the growth of
graduate schools seemed to be the readiness with which
universities adopted this new development without reckon-
ing the cost involved. Furthermore, the existing litera-
ture during this formative period indicated that although
advocates of the graduate school were sincere in their
desire to promote research, the degree of Doctor of Phi-
losophy became the end in view on the part of graduate
students who needed such a degree in their profession.
The nomenclature of the graduate school was not iden-
tical throughout the various universities. There were
at least eight different names in addition to that of "the
graduate school" given to the organization which carried
on similar functions. Generally, a graduate council and
a graduate dean administered this organization. There
seemed, likewise, to be no uniformity as to the official
name that was given to this council in the various insti-
tutions. While the name varied, the functions remained
practically the same. The graduate council was usually
thought of as the graduate dean's cabinet, subject to call
by the dean. The early practice in the history of the
graduate school was that the president of the university
appointed members to this board or council. Today, the
tendency is to have the council members elected by the
faculty with the exception of the graduate dean who is
a member and usually the chairman by right of office.
An illustration of good practice is in Ohio State Univer-
sity where membership in the council has a duration of
144
"three years and (its members) shall, for one year after
the expiration of an appointment, be ineligible for re-
appointment.” This practice seems highly commendable,
and might do away with the tendency of re-electing past
members of the graduate council because it is the line
of least resistance.
THE SEMINAR
The seminar is the accepted work-shop of the graduate
school. It is the graduate school nursery of scientific
research. Inasmuch as the seminar is "a small group of
advanced students carrying on investigations of an orig-
inal nature under the guidance of their instructors,"
it cannot be anything but an advanced technique and it
cannot be employed successfully in any other part of the
educational system except in the graduate school. The
majority of the criticisms leveled against the graduate
school may to a large measure be traced to the weakness
of the seminar courses and of seminar techniques. The
work of research can never be left to the student alone.
The principles of methodic study must be inculcated.
This is a by-product of the seminar, its major objective
being the discovery of truth.
THE ADMINISTRATORS OF
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
The graduate dean's office may be viewed as the inte-
grating headquarters for all research workers. The
functions of the dean are not inquisitorial, but coopera-
tive and strategic. They are performed in such a way
that on the one hand the instructional departments are
stimulated by more direct and inspiring contacts, and
on the other that the President will be supplied with
more specific and comprehensive information about the
details and relations of departmental research. That
the graduate dean's position is a most coveted one in
the university is evidenced by the following five reasons:
145
1. He has the largest opportunity for leadership in
research.
2. He has freedom for educational experimentation.
3. He has relative freedom from budgetary and dis-
ciplinary problems, these are mostly departmental
problems.
4. He enjoys the privilege of comradeship with the
most enterprising professors and the most promis-
ing students.
5. He has immediate professional relationships with
national and even international investigators in all
fields.
DUTIES OF THE GRADUATE DEAN
A position held by any individual becomes important
only to the degree that his duties are important. From
the existing literature and by inference from the state-
ments made by the deans, it seems that the five most
important duties or responsibilities which the graduate
dean must exercise are:
1. He must take the leadership in sponsoring and pro-
moting research.
2. He must discriminate between true research and
all forms of pretenses at research.
3. He must establish sympathetic relationships among
the various departments and units of administration
in the university.
4. He must guide scholars into the best channels where
each can be of maximum usefulness to himself and
to society.
5. With proper guidance, he must allow the graduate
student to be the architect of his own career.
QUALIFICATIONS OF THE GRADUATE DEAN
In order to maintain such a lofty position in the uni-
versity as was mentioned above, and in order to carry
146
out these aforesaid duties, it seems that the more im-
portant qualifications of a graduate dean are regarded as:
1. Interest and proven success in research in his own
specialty.
2. Ability to see the importance of true research in a
relationship large enough to encompass the entire
university.
3. Keeping fairly well abreast with the research of his
associates.
4. Possessing the vision of a pioneer; i. e., have a bal-
anced insight into the possibilities of true research.
5. Knowing how to deal with the human element in his
relationships with the faculty and graduate students.
PROBLEMS OF GRADUATE DEAN
From the interviews and correspondence with graduate
deans, it appears that the major concerns or problems
which a graduate dean faces in the administration of his
school may be summarized as follows:
1. The improvement of the quality of students admitted
to the graduate school.
2. Improving and maintaining high standards for the
Master's and Doctor's degrees.
3. Encouraging better faculty and student researches.
4. Insistance upon a strong undergraduate prepara-
tion as the best means for better graduate work.
5. Better graduate offerings and better graduate
teaching methods.
FINAL SUMMARY
This study has traced the steps which made for organ-
ized research in an institution known in Europe as the
university and in America as the graduate school. The
period prior to the organization of Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity may be regarded as the missionary period while
147
the half-century following the establishment of Johns
Hopkins University in 1876 was the formative period in
which the graduate school became an established research
organism in the realm of higher education in the United
States. We are now entering into a third period which
may be thought of as a period of evaluation and progress.
But progress which departs from well established and
tested basic principles is likely to bring intellectual chaos
and retardation.
This study offers concrete evidence that the American
people are sufficiently open-minded to accept ideas of
other lands which have merit and are not opposed to the
American philosophy of democracy. We may take it for
granted that the American university is here and is here
to stay. The American system of higher education is
the College-University type of organization. Although
the advocates of the graduate school were sincere in their
desire to promote research, the degree of Doctor of Philo-
sophy became the end in view on the part of graduate
students who needed such a degree in their profession.
The majority of the criticism leveled against the graduate
school may, to a large measure, be traced to the weakness
of the seminar courses and the seminar techniques. The
work of research can never be left to the student alone.
The principles of methodic study must be inculcated.
This is a by-product of the seminar, its major objective
being the discovery of truth. The graduate school is to
be judged by the extent and the fullness with which this
ideal is brought into active reality by both the professor
and the student. The criterion of the usefulness of the
graduate school is the extent and fullness of its services
to its own groups, to society in general, and to the moral
and intellectual progress of its own constituency.
Stated more specifically, this study:
1. Establishes continuity of events in the history of
the graduate school.
2. Establishes historically the real function of the
graduate school.
148
3. Identifies the graduate school with the Faculty of
Philosophy.
4. Traces the evolution of a systematic effort to or-
ganize graduate schools in America. Three distinct
stages are discernible, namely:
(1) the missionary period, or the period prior to
the establishment of Johns Hopkins University.
(2) the formative period, or the time from the
establishment of Johns Hopkins University to
the establishment of the Graduate School in
Brown University (1927)
During this formative period the three types
of organization were:
(a) Institutions established essentially as
graduate schools.
(b) Institutions where undergraduate and
graduate schools were established simul-
taneously.
(c) Institutions following the college-univer-
sity pattern.
(3) the period of evaluation and progress.
5. Presents evidence that the establishment of the
graduate school in America was the result of meticu-
lous study of the best practices in Europe and
America.
6. Publishes for the first time the original manuscript,
in photostatic fashion, the first draft for the organ-
ization of the first Graduate School in America.
7. Establishes the true meaning and purpose of the
official workshop of the graduate school.
8. Points out present day problems.
9. Suggests future research problems.
10. Presents a carefully compiled bibliography which
should be of immense value to future research
workers.
149
•
You can never say with complacency, "There the provision
for the university is now complete.' The university is never
finished. If it has any genuine life, that life is growth.
It must continue to go forward. The moment the University
stops growing, I do not say in number of students, but in the
intellectual development, that moment it has begun to die.
If it stands still, it is retrograding, not alone relatively to
other universities, but absolutely.
(President Angell, University
of Michigan)
FINIS.
1
1
2
150
=
SUGGESTED FUTURE RESEARCH
Throughout this study, several problems presented
themselves which might be desirable undertakings for
future investigations and study. Briefly stated they are:
1. Should each graduate school endeavor to embrace all
possible phases of advanced study? What is the point
of economic advantage beyond which a graduate school
should not undertake graduate work, or should the
graduate school consider the entire field of research
as its allotted domain and so administer its academic
life that advanced students will find there facilities
for all kinds of graduate work?
2.
3. Generally three types of courses are announced in uni-
versity catalogues, namely: those limited to under-
graduate students; those open to both graduate and
undergraduate students; and those limited to graduate
students. What is the line of demarcation, first, as
given in the catalogue; second, in actual classroom
procedure; third, in the number and type of graduate
students who avail themselves of the more advanced
types of courses? What is advanced about these
courses? Can we arrive at a better and clearer dif-
ferentiation between the types of courses now offered?
4.
5.
6.
There is little doubt that graduate schools have lived
up to the American concept that competition is the
life of educational growth. Does educational rivalry
between different graduate schools of the country
make for or against the advancement of learning?
7.
To what extent is the graduate school squandering
money by duplicating courses under different names?
One institution offers approximately forty courses in
guidance. Another has an established personnel de-
partment which offers guidance courses, but guidance
courses are also offered in such other departments as
Vocational Education, Educational Sociology, and in
Secondary Education. Is there any economic justifica-
tion for such a procedure? Under what conditions
should new courses be added to the curriculum?
Apart from pressure groups, are there any other de-
vices by which a department may be recognized as
worthy of offering graduate work?
Is the progress of the graduate school justified in view
of the reasons offered for its establishment?
What social improvements may be directly attributed
to the graduate school? What contributions does the
university faculty make to the nation in time of a
national crisis? In time of war? In time of a de-
151
8.
9. What changes should be made in the undergraduate
work so that an embryonic scholar and research worker
may be recognized and encouraged to enter the gradu-
ate school? Do we have any means for deciding who
shall be encouraged to do graduate work? Or are
we making graduate work, common work, and hoping
for the best?
10.
11.
pression? What progress is made in times of peace
and tranquility?
Some graduate schools have a rather formal ordinance
of organization and keep records of additional ordi-
nances.. These may be said to form the written con-
stitution of the graduate school. However, scientific
progress is practically impossible in any organization
where rules and regulations predominate. As a result
a sort of an "unwritten constitution" has developed
which is better known as precedents. Hence, what
is the "Unwritten Constitution of the Graduate School?”
12.
The Association of American Universities has a definite
purpose for its existence. It is time someone made
a study of the effect of this Association upon Graduate
Schools. To what extent has this Association been
"a pronounced failure?”
It is stated that the graduate schools are turning out
inferior Ph.D.'s. What kind of doctoral dissertations
are written today in comparison to those of ten years
ago, twenty years ago, thirty, and forty years ago?
Are our present dissertations based on "counting
noses,' or counting feathers" as some would say?
What is the cause of the cheapening of the doctoral
dissertations and how may the situation be improved?
"
66
What is the relation of graduate schools to the work
of independent foundations?
13. Is there any relation between the library and library
endowment to the success of the graduate schools and
universities?
152
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. List of Primary Sources.
2. Bibliographical Guide.
3. General Bibliography.
4. Bibliography of Universities in
Middle Ages.
5. Bibliography of Individual Universities in-
cluded in This Study.
6. Bibliography of the Seminar.
*
•
+
153
PRIMARY MATERIAL
Edward C. Elliott and M. M. Chambers in their Char-
ters and Basic Laws of Selected American Universities
and Colleges, published in 1934 by the Carnegie Founda-
tion for the Advancement of Teaching in cooperation
with Purdue University, presented a compilation of the
charters of fifty-one representative institutions with
brief historical statements and digests of legislative acts
and court decisions. In addition to this source-book,
other original sources employed were, whenever avail-
able, the following:
1. The act of incorporation.
Statutes and by-laws.
Fizim Hi
2.
Ordinances of organization of the Graduate School.
4. Minutes of the Board of Regents.
Minutes of the Board of Trustees.
6. Minutes of the Committee on Graduate Studies.
7.
Faculty Records.
8.
Inaugural addresses.
9.
3.
5.
Report of the President.
Report of the Dean of the Graduate School.
10.
11.
Report of the Dean of Faculties.
12.
The Annual Register.
13. The Bulletin of the University, (or) Announcements.
14. The Bulletin of the Graduate School, (or) Announce-
ments.
15. The Official Circular (Johns Hopkins University).
SECONDARY MATERIAL
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDES
Abel, J. F., Higher Education in Foreign Countries, Its History
and Present Status. A List of References. Washington,
D. C.: United States Office of Education, Circular No. 77,
Mimeographed, 1933.
Annotated Bibliography (Higher Education). United States
Bureau of Education, Bulletin, No. 23, 1928.
Bibliography of Research Studies in Higher Education, 1932-33.
United States Office of Education, Vol. 17. Washington,
D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1934.
Bibliography of Research in Higher Education. Regional Con-
ference on Higher Education, 1931. Office of Education.
Washington, D. C.: United States Government Printing
Office, 1935.
·
154
Bibliography of Research Studies in Education, Higher Education.
In: United States Office of Education, Library Division. 1926-
27, pp. 81-89; 1927-28, pp. 114-121; 1928-29, pp. 155-163;
1929-30, pp. 224-38.
List of References on Higher Education. United States Bureau
of Education Library Leaflets, No. 28, Washington, D. C.:
Government Printing Office, 1924.
Literature on Higher Education. Association of Colleges, Bul-
letin, Vol. 17, pp. 303-4, May, 1931.
Monroe, Walter S., and others, Ten Years of Educational Research,
1918-27. Bureau of Educational Research. College of Edu-
cation, Bulletin No. 42, Urbana, Illinois, University of
Illinois, 1927.
Remmers, H. H., Ten-Year Review of Studies in Higher Educa-
tion. Purdue University, 1934.
Russell, J. D., and others, Selected References on Higher Edu-
cation, School Review 41 (December, 1933), pp. 780-6.
Russell, J. D., and others, Selected References on Higher Educa-
tion, School Review, Vol. 42 (December, 1934), pp. 780-6.
GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams H. B., Thomas Jefferson and the University of Virginia.
United States Bureau of Education, Circular No. 1, 1888.
Arrowood, Charles F., Thomas Jefferson and Education in
Republic. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1930.
Becker, G. H., Vom wesen der deutschen universität. Leipsic,
a
1925.
Betts, G. H., Subsidizing Graduate Study. Journal of Higher
Education 3 (November, 1932), pp. 415-18.
Bird, Joseph B., A Study of the Problem of Faculty Control in
State Universities. Ph.D. Dissertation, New York University,
1930.
Bizzell, W. B., Higher Education in the Southwest. School and
Society, 42 (December 28, 1935), pp. 873-80.
*Bowman, Isaiah, The Graduate School in American Democracy.
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1939.
Brandenburg, W. A., Report of the Committee Appointed to Make
a Survey of the Graduate Study in Member Institutions of
American Association of Teachers Colleges. (In: American
Association of Teachers Colleges Fifteenth Yearbook), 1936.
Cajori, F., A History of Physics in Its Elementary Branches,
Including the Evolution of Physical Laboratories... New York:
The Macmillan Company, 1899.
Capen, Samuel P., Recent Movements in College and University
Administration. Washington: United States Government
Printing Office, 1917.
Cattell, James McKeen, University Control. New York: The
Science Press, 1913.
Caullery, Maurice, Universities and Scientific Life in the United
States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1922.
Chamberlain, Joshua L., Universities and Their Sons; History,
Influence and Characteristics of American Universities.
Boston: R. Herndon Company, 1898-1900.
Coffman, L. D., State University, Its Work and Problems.
neapolis, The University of Minnesota Press, 1934.
*Published after completion of this study.
Min-
155
Cole, Percival R., The Rise of Universities.
vember, 1928), pp. 18-31.
Schooling 12 (No.
Committee on Graduate Instruction, Survey of Graduate Schools.
School and Society 39 (May 19, 1934), pp. 653-4.
Compayre, Gabriel, Histoire critique des doctrines de l'education
Paris, 1879.
en France depuis le seizieme siecle.
Cubberley, Ellwood P., Public Education in the United States.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1934.
Cubberley, Ellwood P., Readings in the History of Education.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1920.
Edwards, N., Reorganization of Graduate Study in the United
States. School and Society, 42 (October 5, 1935), pp. 469-72.
Eells, Walter C., American Graduate Schools. School and Society,
39 (June 2, 1934), pp. 708-12.
Eells, Walter C., Another Ranking of American Graduate Schools.
School and Society 46 (August 28, 1937), pp. 282-4.
Embree, Edwin R., In Order of their Eminence. The Atlantic
School
Monthly (May, 1935).
Eisenhart, L. P., Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.
and Society 45 (April 10, 1937), pp. 497-503.
Fairchild, Henry P., Conference of Universities on the Obligation
of Universities to the Social Order. New York: New York
University Press, 1933.
Fiddes, Edward, American Universities; a Lecture delivered at
the University of Manchester, November 16, 1925. New
York: Longmans Green and Company, 1926.
Flexner, Abraham, Universities:
American, English, German.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1930.
Flexner, A., Failing of Our Graduate Schools. Atlantic Monthly
149 (April, 1932), pp. 441-52.
Foster, Laurence, Functions of a Graduate School in a Demo-
cratic Society. New York: Huxley House Publishers, 1936.
Furniss, E. S., Status of Graduate Education in the United States.
School and Society 39 (April 7, 1934), pp. 440-42.
Gaw, Allison, A Sketch of the Development of Graduate Work in
the University of Southern California, 1910-35. Los Angeles:
University of Southern California Press, 1935.
Graves, E. P., Evolution of Our Universities.
School and Society,
8 (December 14, 1918), pp. 691-702.
Hamlyn, V. W. C., Universities of Europe at the Period of the
Reformation; the Stanhope Prize Essay for 1876. Oxford,
1876.
Heller, Otto, Assumption of Graduate Work by Undergraduate
Institutions. Association of American Universities Journal
of Proceedings, pp. 54-60, 1933.
Henman, V. A. C., The Function, Value, and Future of Education-
al Research in Colleges and Universities. Journal of Educa-
tional Research 27 (March, 1934), pp. 493-502.
Herren, J. M., Graduate Schools: Their Present Practices, Policies,
and Problems. M. A. Thesis, Department of Education,
Western Reserve University, May 15, 1931, pp. 251-293.
Hibben, J. G., The Type of Graduate Scholars. Fifteenth Annual
Conference. Bulletin of the Association of American Uni-
versities, Vol. 15, 1913.
Hinsdale, Burke A., Documents Illustrative of American Educa-
tional History. Report of United States Commisioner of
Education, 1892-3, Vol. II, Part III, pp. 1223-1414.
Hinsdale, Burke A., Notes on the History of Foreign Influence
upon Education in the United States. Report of the Com-
156
missioner of Education for the Year 1897-98, Vol. I, Part I,
Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1890.
Holme, Ernest R., The American University; an Australian View.
Sidney: Augus and Robertson, Ltd., 1920.
Hughes, R. M., Report of the Committee on Graduate Instruction.
Educational Record 15 (April, 1934), pp. 192-234.
Hughes, R. M., A Study of the Graduate Schools of America.
Paper read before the Association of American Colleges,
January, 1925. Oxford, Ohio, Miami University. Bulletin
of Association of American Colleges, Vol. II, No. 3, 1925.
Hutchins, Robert M., The Chicago Plan and Graduate Study.
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Association of
American Universities. Thirty-Third Annual Conference,
November, 1931.
Hutchins, Robert M., What Is a University? A Radio Speech.
Delivered April 18, 1935. The National Broadcasting Com-
pany, under the auspices of the National Congress of Parents
and Teachers.
Jessup, W. A., Adaptation of Graduate Work to Social Needs.
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Association of
American Universities. Thirty-Seventh Annual Conference,
1935.
John, Walton, C., Graduate Study in Universities and Colleges
in the United States. Washington: United States Govern-
ment Printing Office, No. 20, 1934.
Johnston, J. B., Integration of the Upper Division of American
College and Graduate School. Journal of Proceedings and
Adresses of the Association of American Universities. Thirty-
fourth Annual Conference, 1932.
Jourdain, Charles M.,
Charles M., Histoire de l'Universite de Paris au
17-e et au 18-e siecle. Paris, 1862-66.
Kellogg, Vernon, Isolation or Cooperation in Research. Reprint
and Circular Series of the National Research Council, No. 67.
Kimball, D. S., Appraisal of American Universities in Terms of
Graduate Study. Journal of Engineering 48 (May, 1934),
pp. 70-1.
Klein, A. J. Graduate Work. Survey of Land-Grant Colleges and
Universities. Bulletin No. 9, 1930. Washington: Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1930.
Kotsching, Walter M., The University in a Changing World.
London: Oxford University Press, 1932.
Kunkel, B. W., Representation of the Colleges in Graduate and
Professional Schools. School and Society 35 (March 12,
1932), pp. 364-70.
Ladd, George T., The Development of the American University.
Scribner's Magazine II (September, 1887), pp. 346-60.
Lowell, Abbott L., At War With Academic Traditions in America.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1934.
Lowell, A. Lawrence, What a University President Has Learned.
New York: The Macmillan Company, 1938.
McCormick, Patrick J., History of Education. Washington, D. C.,
1915.
McNultz, J. L., University Problem that Should Be Recognized;
Suggesting Reforms in the Doctorate Courses. America 56
(April 30, 1937), pp. 609-10.
Meadows, John C., The Functions of a State University. Nash-
ville; George Peabody College for Teachers, 1927.
Monroe, Paul, A Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. 5. New York:
The Macmillan Company, 1913.
+
~]
A
A
A
157
Mullinger, James B.,
History of the University of Cambridge.
Cambridge; The University Press, 1873.
Newman, John Henry, The Idea of a University. The Harvard
Classics, edited by Charles W. Eliot. "Essays, English and
American." New York, 1910.
Ogden, R. M. Relation of Undergraduates to Graduate Study.
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Association of
American Universities. Thirty-seventh Annual Conference,
1935.
Ornstein, Martha, The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seven-
teenth Century. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
1928.
Pierson, W. W., Organization of a Graduate School within the
University. Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the
Association of American Universities. Thirty-Seventh Annual
Conference, 1935.
Princeton Alumni Weekly, Survey of Graduate Schools. School
and Society 39 (May 19, 1934), pp. 653-54.
Pritchett, Henry S., The Spirit of the State Universities.
Ber-
keley, California: University of California, 1910.
Puschman, Theodore, A History of Medical Education from the
Most Remote to the Most Recent Times. London, 1891.
Reichel, H. R., Some Interesting Features of American Univer-
sities. Cardiff: William Lewis Printer, 1905.
The Relation of Senior College and Graduate School.
Association of Collegiate Registrars 2 (April, 1927), No. 4,
pp. 334-52.
Report on University Nomenclature. Journal of Pro-
ceedings and Addresses of Association of American Uni-
versities, 1910.
Richardson, R. G. D., Present Need of a Constructive Review of
Graduate Schools. Journal of Proceedings and Addresses
of the Association of American Universities, Thirty-Seventh.
Annual Conference, 1935.
Ricketts, Palmer C., History of the Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute. Troy, New York, 1930.
Rise of the Graduate School.
Sixth Annual Report of
the President and Treasurer. The Carnegie Foundation for
the Advancement of Teaching, 1911.
Robinson, E. S., New Opportunities for the Liberal Graduate
Schools. Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the
Association of American Universities. Thirty-Eighth An-
nual Conference, 1936.
(Ross, G. W.) Universities of Canada, Their History and Or-
ganization; with an Outline of British and American Uni-
versity Systems. Toronto, 1896.
Ryan, W. Carson, Notes on Early Graduate Education. Thirty-
Second and Thirty-Third Annual Report, the Carnegie Foun-
dation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1937 and 1938.
*Ryan, W. Carson, Studies in Early Graduate Education. The
Carnegie Foundation for
for the Advancement of Teaching.
Bulletin No. 30, 1939.
Santayana, George, The Genteel Tradition at Bay. New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1931.
Schleiermacher, Frederick E., Gelengentliche Gedanken uber Uni-
versitaten in deutschen Sinne. Berlin, 1908.
* Published after completion of this study.
158
Sherwood, Sidney, The University of the State of New York:
History of Higher Education in the State of New York.
Washington, D. C.: United States Bureau of Education,
Circular of Information, No. 3, 1900.
Slosson, Edwin E., Great American Universities.
New York:
The Macmillan Company, 1910.
New
Slosson, Edwin E., The American Spirit in Education.
Haven: The Yale University Press, 1921.
Spaulding, J. L., University, Nursery of Higher Life.
Bureau Report, Vol. I, pp. 634-47, 1899.
Ten Brook, Andrew, American Universities, Their Origin and
Progress; a history of congressional university land grants,
a particular account of the rise and development of the
University of Michigan, and hints toward the future of
American University system. Cincinnati: R. Clarke and
Company, 1875.
Educational
Tewksbury, Donald G., The Founding of American Colleges and
Universities before the Civil War. Teachers College Con-
tribution to Education, No. 543. New York: Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1932.
Thilly, Frank, Modern University Problems, an Address at the
University of Missouri Convocation, September 11, 1930,
with an introduction by Walter Williams, President. Uni-
versity of Missouri Bulletin, Vol. 32, No. 3, 1931.
Thompson, Williard C., The Philosophy and History of the Land
Grant Colleges and Universities in the United States of
America. New York: Ph.D. Dissertation, New York Univer-
sity, 1934.
Thwing, Charles F., The American and German University; One
Hundred Years of History. New York: The Macmillan
Company, 1928.
Thwing, Charles F., The American College and University; A
Human Fellowship. New York: The Macmillan Company,
1935.
Thwing, Charles F., History of Higher Education in America.
New York: D. Appleton Century Company, 1906.
Tufts, James H., The Graduate School. In: Higher Education
in America, edited by Raymond A. Kent, Chapter XI, Boston:
Ginn and Company, 1930.)
-Universities, Graduate Departments, Discussions and
Statistics. Bulletin of the Bureau of Education, Vol. 2, pp.
815-26. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1889-90.
Van Hise, Charles R., The Place of the University in a Democ-
racy. Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the National
Education Association of the United States, 1916.
Wagner, Adolph H. G., Die entwicklung der Universität Berlin,
1810-1896. Rectorasrede von Professor Adolf Wagner, mit
noten und Statistischen anhang. Berlin, J. Becker, 1896.
Walsh, J. J., Education, Old and New. New York: Fordham
University Press, 1910.
Watson, Foster, The Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Education.
London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1921.
Watson, J. B., Negro Graduate School?
Journal of Negro Educa-
tion 7 (October, 1938), pp. 533-4.
Weld, C. R., A History of the Royal Society with Memoirs of the
Presidents, compiled from authentic documents. London, 1848.
Wertenbaker, Thomas J., Our Intellectual Graveyard. American
Scholar III (March, 1934).
'Wilkins, E. H., The relation of the Senior College and the Gradu-
1
ป
P
159
ate School.
Association of American Universities. Journal
of Proceedings and Addresses, Vol. 28-29, p. 67, 1926.
Woodbridge, F. J. E., Social and Educational Significance of the
Growth in Numbers of the Graduate Schools. Association
of American Universities. Journal of Proceedings and Ad-
dresses, pp. 100-110, 1933.
Yoakum, Charles S., Functions of the Faculty: the Work Load;
a Historical Survey. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 1932.
Zook, George F., Present Position of Graduate Studies in the
United States. School and Society 43 (January 11, 1936),
pp. 41-9.
UNIVERSITIES IN MIDDLE AGES
Abelson, P., The Seven Liberal Arts. New York: Bureau of Pub-
lications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1906.
Compayre, G., Abelard and the Origin and Early History of
Universities. New York: Scribner, 1893.
Haskins, C. H., The Rise of Universities. New York: Henry Holt
and Company, 1923.
Jebb, R. C., The Work of the Universities Past and Present.
Cambridge, 1893.
Laurie, S. S., Rise and Constitution of Universities.
New York:
D. Appleton and Company, 1887.
Lynn, Caro, A College Professor of the Renaissance.
Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press. 1937.
Paetow, L. J., The Arts course at Medieval Universities. Univer-
sity of Illinois Studies, Vol. 3, No. 7. University of Illinois
Press, Urbana, Illinois, January, 1910.
Paulsen, Frederick, The German Universities, Their Charter and
Historical Development. Translated by Edward
Edward Delaven
Perry. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1895.
Paulsen, Frederick, The German
The German Universities and University
Study. Authorized translation by Frank Thilly and William
W. Lang. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1906.
Rashdall, Hastings, The Universities of Europe in the Middle
Ages. Oxford: The Claredon Press, 1936.
INDIVIDUAL UNIVERSITIES
BROWN UNIVERSITY:
Report of the Survey Committee.
S. P. Capen, L. P. Eizenhart,
G. S. Ford. Providence: The University, 1930.
Brownson, W. C., History of Brown University, 1764-1914.
idence: Published by the Author, 1914.
Prov-
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA:
Cox, Joseph G., The Administration of Seminaries;
Historical
Synopsis and Commentary. Washington, D. C.: The Catholic
University of America, 1931. (J. C. D. Dissertation.)
Guilday, Peter, Graduate Studies. Printed Privately for the Use
of the Graduate Students of the Catholic University of
America. Washington, D. C., 1924.
Shahan, Rt. Rev. Thomas J., The Catholic University of America,
1889-1916. New York: The Paulist Press, 1916.
160
CLARK UNIVERSITY:
Atwood, Wallace W., The First Fifty Years. An Administrative
Report. Publications of the Clark University Library,
Worcester, Massachusetts, Clark University, June, 1937.
Davis, William M., A Graduate School of Geography. Commence-
ment Address at Clark University, June 12, 1922. Worces-
ter, Massachusetts, Clark University Library, 1922.
Lillie, Ralph S., The Universities and Investigation. An Address
delivered on Founder's Day, February 1, 1915. Worcester,
Massacusetts, Clark University Press, 1915.
Sanford, Edmund C., A Sketch of the History of Clark University.
Publications of the Clark University Library. Worcester,
Massachusetts, Clark University, January, 1923.
Story, William, E., Clark University, 1889-1899. Decennial
Celebration. Worcester, Massachusetts: Printed for the Uni-
versity, 1899.
Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of Clark University, 1889-1914. Pub
lications of the Clark University Library. Worcester,
Massachusetts: Clark University, July, 1914.
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY:
Barnard, Frederick A. P., The Rise of a University.
Edited by
William F. Russell, New York: Columbia University Press,
1937.
Burgess, John W., The Founding of the School of Political Science.
Columbia University Quarterly, Vol .XXII. (December, 1930),
No. 4.
History of Columbia University, 1754-1904.
Published in Com-
memoration of the 150th Anniversary of the Founding of
King's College, New York: Columbia University, 1904.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY:
Cornell Daily Sun. A Half-Century at Cornell, 1880-1930; a
Retrospect Sponsored by the Cornell Daily Sun to Com-
memorate the 50th Anniversary of its Founding. Ithaca:
The Cayuga Press. 1930.
Gage, Seman H., Brief History of Cornell University.
(The First
Three Classes at Cornell University). 1930.
Hewett, W. F., Cornell University, a History. 4 vols. New York,
1905.
Howe, H. C., Graduate Study at Cornell. In: University of Oregon
Monthly, 6, No. 8 (May, 1902).
Johanson, Carl M., Scrap Book of Carl M. Johanson.
Cornell
1890-92, Cornell University Library.
New York Evening Post, The Cornell University; Its History,
Purpose, and the Course of Study. Newspaper clippings
pasted on Blank Leaves. Ithaca, Cornell University Library.
Poole, Murray E., A Story, Historical, of Cornell University with
biographies of Distinguished Cornellians. Ithaca, New York,
1916.
Proceedings and Addresses at the Semi-Centennial Celebration of
Cornell University. Ithaca: Published by the University,
1919.
Report of the Committee on Organization, presented to the Trus-
tees of Cornell University, October 21, 1866. Signed by
A. D. White, Albany: C. Van Benthuysen and Sons' Print-
ing House, 1867.
161
HARVARD UNIVERSITY:
Batchelder, Samuel F., Bits of Harvard History. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1924.
Bush, George G., Harvard, the First American University. Boston:
Cupples, Upham and Company, 1886.
Eliot, Charles W., Harvard Memories.
versity Press, 1923.
Gardiner, John H., Harvard.
Cambridge: Harvard Uni-
New York: Oxford University Press,
American Branch, 1914.
Graduate School of Business Administration. A School of Pub-
lic and Private Business. Report of the Dean to the Visiting
Committee Appointed by the Overseers of Harvard Univer-
sity. Boston: Harvard Press, 1934.
Hanus, Paul H., Adventuring in Education.
Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1937.
New York:
1
Hill, George B. N., Harvard College, by an Oxonian.
The Macmillan Company, 1894.
Historical Register of Harvard University, 1636-1936. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1937.
Kirkpatrick, John E., The Rise of Non-Resident Government in
Harvard University and How Harvard Is Governed. Ann
Arbor, Michigan: G. Wahr, 1925.
Morison, Samuel E., The Development of Harvard University
Since the Inauguration of President Eliot, 1869-1929. Cam--
bridge Harvard University Press, 1930.
Morison, Samuel E., The Founding of Harvard College.
Cam-
bridge: Harvard University Press, 1935.
Morison, Samuel E., Three Centuries of Harvard, 1636-1936.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936.
INDIANA UNIVERSITY:
Harding, S. B., Indiana University, 1820-1904; and Historical
Sketch. Bloomington: The University, 1904.
Memorial Volume.
Indiana University, 1820-1920; Centennial Memorial
Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University, 1921.
Payne, Fernandus, The Graduate School. Indiana University
Alumni Quarterly, October, 1931.
Payne, Fernandus, History of the Indiana University Graduate
School, 1880-1935. Cn file in the office of the Dean of the
Graduate School.
Indiana
Rawles, W. A., Historical Sketch of the University.
University Bulletin, Vol. 8, No. 4, Indiana, 1904.
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY:
Berry, E. W. Plan for Reorganization of Graduate Work at Johns
Hopkins University. Association of American Universities.
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses, Thirty-Second Annual
Conference, 1930.
Bloomfield, Editor, Bibliographia Hopkinsiensis, 1876-93. Balti-
more: Johns Hopkins University, 1892-4.
Boas, George, Democracy Among Scholars, The Johns Hopkins
Alumni Magazine, November, 1937.
Bredvold, Louis I., An Outsider Appraises Hopkins. The Johns
Hopkins Alumni Magazine, April, 1938.
Breunig, L., Graduate Work at Johns Hopkins. il. Volta Review,
39 (April, 1937), pp. 205-8.
Review of Re-
Butler, N., President Gilman's Administration.
views, January, 1901.
162
Johns Hopkins University, Daniel Coit Gilman, First President of
Johns Hopkins University, 1876-1901. Baltimore: The
Johns Hopkins Press, 1908. Also in the Johns Hopkins
University Circular, New Series, 1908, Whole Number 211,
December, 1908.
Didler, Eugene L., Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore, 1897.
Edmunds, Charles K., A Half-Century of Johns Hopkins. A
Fruitful Fifty Years at the Baltimore University. The
American Review of Reviews, November, 1926.
Franklin, F., The Life of Daniel Coit Gilman. New York: Dodd,
Mead and Company, 1910.
French, J. C., Johns Hopkins University. In: History of Baltimore.
New York, 1912, Vol. 1, pp. 598-607. (Johns Hopkins
University Library).
Gilman, Daniel C., The Group System of College Studies in the
Johns Hopkins University. New York: Houghton Mifflin
Company, 1886.
Gilman, Daniel C., The Johns Hopkins University from 1873 to
1893. No place, no date. (Pamphlets in Johns Hopkins
Library and Teachers College Library, Columbia University.)
Gilman, Daniel C., The Launching of a University and Other
Papers. New York: Dodd Mead and Company, 1906.
Griffin, Edward H., Twenty-Five Years of Johns Hopkins.
Culture, September, 1899.
Self-
Johns Hopkins University, Celebration of the Twenty-Fifth Anni-
versary. (Pamphlet in Johns Hopkins University Library.)
Johns Hopkins University in its Relation to the State of Maryland.
No place, no date. (Pamphlet in Johns Hopkins University
Library, and Teachers College Library, Columbia University.)
Maryland Legislature. Memorial of Johns Hopkins University to
the Legislature of Maryland. Baltimore, 1898. 12 pp.
(In Johns Hopkins University Library, and Teachers College
Library, Columbia University.)
Sibler, E. G., The Beginnings of Johns Hopkins, 1876-79. In his
From Maumee to Thames and Tiber, pp. 95-115, 1930.
Sprague, Homer B., Daniel Coit Gilman, Fasciculus III. Yale
Literary Magazine.
Statements respecting Johns Hopkins University of Baltimore,
Presented to the Public on the Twentieth Anniversary, 1896.
61 pp.
No place, no date. (Pamphlet in Johns Hopkins
Library, and in Teachers College Library, Columbia Uni-
versity.)
Steiner, Bernard C., The History of University Education in
Maryland. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1891.
Thomas, James C., A Brief Review of the Ten Years' Work of
the Johns Hopkins University, by one of the Trustees, James
Carey Thomas. Baltimore: John Murphy and Company,
1886.
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY:
James, James A., University Relationships. An unpublished manu-
Consolidated Book Publishers, Inc., 1934.
James, James A., A Sketch of the History of the Northwestern
University Graduate School. An unpublished manuscript
on file Northwestern University Library, Evanston, Illinois.
James, James A., University Relationships. An unpublished manu-
script on file, Northwestern University Library, Evanston,
Illinois, (1929).
•
F
163
Ward, Estelle F., The Story of Northwestern University. New
York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1924.
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY:
Mendenhall, Thomas, History of the
the Ohio State
University.
Columbus: The Ohio University Press, 4 vols., 1920-1934.
"The Graduate School," Vol. II, pp. 110-115.
Report of the Committee on Revision of University Rules. Co-
lumbus, Ohio, 1930, 54 pp.
Report of the Committee on Organization of Graduate School.
Columbus, Ohio, 1909, 7 pp.
Report of Special Committee of the Administrative Council to
Consider the Use of Ranks Below that of Instructor. Co-
lumbus, Ohio, 1930, 3 pp.
Report of Administrative Council on the Use of Academic Ranks.
Columbus, Ohio, 1931, 6 pp.
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY:
Collins, Varnum L., Princeton. New York: Oxford University
Press, American Branch, 1914.
Norris, Edwin M., The Story of Princeton.
Boston: Little, Brown
and Company, 1917.
Graduate Advisory Committee, Princeton College; Constitution
of the Graduate Advisory Committee, Princeton: Princeton
Press, 1888. 30 pp.
Private Documents for the University Faculty; Standards of
Graduate Work; Report of the Faculty Committee on the
Graduate School, December 9, 1901.
7 pp.
The Graduate School, 1904-5. No place, no date,
28 pp.
STANFORD UNIVERSITY:
Report of Organization Committee upon the Organization of the
Faculty and Articles of Organization of the Faculty, 1904.
Elliott, Orrin L., Stanford University, the First Twenty-Five
Years. Stanford University, California: Stanford University
Press. London: A. Milford, Oxford University Press, 1937.
Hand, Harold C., Campus Activities. Prepared by the Stanford
Student Leadership Seminar. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company, 1938.
STATE
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA:
Ashton, John W., Trends in Graduate Work; a Program Com-
memorating the Thirtieth Anniversary of the founding of the
Graduate College of the State University of Iowa. New
Series No. 194. Iowa City: Published by the University.
January 1, 1931.
Fifty Years of Progress.
Proceedings of the Celebration of the
Fiftieth Anniversary of the College of Education. Iowa
City: The University of Iowa Extension Bulletin, No. 133.
October 1, 1925.
The Ninetieth Anniversary of the State University of Iowa. Iowa
City: The University, 1937.
Stoddard, George D., Some current Issues in Graduate Work.
School and Society 48 (July 30, 1938), pp. 125-32.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA:
Ferrier, William W., Origin and Development of the University
of California. Berkeley: The Sather Gate Book Shop, 1930.
Standing Rules of the Graduate Council, Berkeley, 1897.
11 pp.
164
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO:
Flint, Nott W., The University of Chicago, A Sketch.
Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1904.
Goodspeed, Thomas W., A History of the University of Chicago,
founded by John D. Rockefeller; the first quarter century.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1916.
Hutchins, Robert M., The Chicago Plan and Graduate Study.
Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Association of
American Universities. Thirty-Third Annual Conference,
November, 1931.
Koenitzer, Charles H., History of the First University of Chicago,
1856-1886. (Rare Book Room, University of Chicago
Library)), 85 pp.
Chicago: Uni-
Reeves, Floyd W., Trends in University Growth.
versity of Chicago Press, 1933.
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS:
Historical Sketch of the University of Illinois. Seventeenth
Biennial Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction,
1887-8.
Statement Concerning the Graduate School at the University of
Illinois. No place, no date. Leaflet in Library, University
of Illinois.
Sixteen Years at the University of Illinois, 1904-1920. A Sta-
tistical Study of the Administration of President Edmund J.
James, Urbana, 1920.
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS:
University of Kansas: something of its history, its present con-
dition, and its hopes for future years. Lawrence, Kansas:
Watson Library, 1931.
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN:
Hinsdale, Burke A., A History of the University of Michigan,
with Biographical Sketches of the Regents and Members of
the University Senate from 1873-1906. Ann Arbor: Pub-
lished by the University, 1906.
Shaw, Wilfred B., A Short History of the University of Michigan.
Ann Arbor: George Wahr, 1937. Bibliography.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA:
Gilfillan, J. B., An Historical Sketch of the University of Min-
nesota, 1905. 45 pp.
Johnson, E. B., Forty Years of the University of Minnesota.
Illustrated. Minneapolis: The General Alumni Association,
1910. "The Graduate School," pp. 97-100.
Minnesota University, Graduate School. Mayo Foundation for
Medical Education and Research. Philadelphia: W. B.
Sanders Company, 1921.
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI:
Babb, Joseph G., A Short History of the University (of Missouri).
Columbia, Missouri: The University of Missouri, 1915.
The Graduate School. A manuscript on file in office of Dean
Emeritus Walter Miller. 4 pp.
165
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA:
Semi-centennial Anniversary Book. The University of Nebraska,
1869-1919. Lincoln: The University, 1919.
A Primer of University Facts.
Lincoln: Published by the Uni-
versity, 1928. 13 pp.
Biehn, A. B., The Development of the University of Nebraska,
1871-1900. M. A. Thesis. Lincoln, The University of Neb-
raska, 1934.
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA:
Lippencott, H. M., University of Pennsylvania, Franklin's College;
being some account of its beginnings and development, its
customs and traditions and gifts to the nation. Philadelphia:
J. B. Lippincott, 1919.
Nitzsche, George E., Brief Historical Sketch of the University
of Pennsylvania, 1740-1929. In: Birch, T. R., The First
One Hundred Years of the Zelosaphic Literary Society, 1829-
1929.
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA:
Fiftieth Anniversary of Reopening to be Celebrated by Graduate
School. Tar Heel Topics. News from Chapel Hill Number.
Published by the University of North Carolina, Vol VII, No.
1, May, 1934.
Sketches of the History of the University of North Carolina,
Together with a catalogue of officers and students, 1789-
1889. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: By the University, 1889.
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS:
Benedict, Harry Y., A Source Book Relating to the History of
the University of Texas: legislative, legal, bibliographical,
and statistical. Austin, Texas: The University, 1917.
Lane, John J., History of the University of Texas.
Based on
facts and records. Austin; H. Hutchings, State Printer.
(First Edition), 1891.
History of the Graduate School. University of Texas, Austin:
University of Texas Bulletin, No. 2627, 1925-26.
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA:
Barringer, Paul B., University of Virginia; Its History, Influence,
Equipment and Characteristics, with biographical sketches
and portraits of founders, benefactors, officers, and alumni.
New York: Lewis Publishing Company, 1904.
Bruce, P. A., History of the University of Virginia, 1819-1919.
Centennial edition. New York: The Macmillan Company,
1920-22.
May, John, The Department of Graduate Studies. University of
Virginia Alumni News, June, 1937.
Stauffer, William H., Higher Education in Virginia. Report on
Higher Education Made at the Request of George C. Peery,
Governor, and Submitted to the General Assembly, January,
1936.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN:
The Jubilee of the University of Wisconsin, in Celebration of the
Fiftieth Anniversary of Its First Commencement, Held at
Madison, June 4th to June 9th, 1904.
→
166
I
Thwaites, Reuben G., The University of Wisconsin.
and Its Alumni. Madison: J. N. Purcell, 1900.
YALE UNIVERSITY:
Dexter, F. B., Documentary History of Yale University. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1916.
❤
Its History
Yale's Departure from the Traditional Type of Graduate Work.
Elementary School Journal, 36 (January, 1936), pp. 328-30.
THE SEMINAR
Adams, George B, Methods of Work in Historical Seminars.
American Historical Review 10 (April, 1905), pp. 521-33.
Adams, Herbert B., The Seminar Method. Bureau of Education,
1887, pp. 104-110.
Pacific Historical
Chapman, C. E., Graduate Seminar in History.
Review 3 (June, 1934), pp. 113-29.
Fling, N., The Leipzig Seminar, Academy (April-May, 1889).
Howe, H. C., Graduate Study at Cornell. The University of Oregon
Monthly 6 (May, 1902), No. 8.
Monroe, Paul, Seminar. In, Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. 5,
p. 322.
New York: Macmillan Company, 1913.
Morton, G., Instruction in our Graduate Schools. School and
Society 34 (February, 1931), pp. 58-9.
Paulsen, Frederick, The German Universities. Translated by
Edward Delavan Perry. New York: Macmillan Company,
1895. Pp. 254 ff., and pp. 156 ff.
Paulsen, Frederick, The German Universities. Translated by
Frank Thilly and William W. Elang. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1906. pp. 212 ff, and 312 ff.
Pechstein, Louis A., Cincinnati Seminar Plan. School and So-
ciety 41 (June, 1935), pp. 736-39.
Pechstein, Louis A., University of Cincinnati Experimental Pro-
gram in Seminar Instruction. American Educational Re-
search Association, Official Report, 1935, pp. 34-45.
Preston W., Historical Seminar Methods at Leipzig. The Nation,
49 (September 26, 1889), pp. 252-53.
Robinson, L. N., Seminars in the College.
Journal of Political
Economy, 21 (July, 1913), pp. 643-7.
Seligman, Edwin R. A., Seminar Methods of Economic Instruc-
tion. Journal of Political Economy 20 (February, 1912),
pp. 153-79.
Sellers, C. C., Seminars in High School, Why Not?
Educational
Review 74 (December, 1927), pp. 283-84.
Sherman, Z. M., Modern Seminar. Independent 53 (January 3,
1901), pp. 25-28.
The Chronicle, University of Michigan Bulletin, October 18, 1879,
and October 30, 1880.
167
APPENDIX
A. Extract from Last Will and Testament of Johns
Hopkins.
B. Organization Plan of the University of Chicago.
C. Organization Plan of the Graduate School, Princeton
University.
D. Organization Plan of the Graduate School, Cornell
University.
E. Organization Plan of the Graduate School, University
of Minnesota.
F. Organization Plan of the Graduate School, Washing-
ton University.
G. Reorganization of the Graduate School, Northwestern
University.
H. Reorganization of the Graduate School, University
of Pennsylvania.
I
Reorganization of the Graduate School, Ohio State
University.
168
APPENDIX A
EXTRACT FROM WILL OF JOHNS HOPKINS
"I give, devise and bequeath unto "The Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity,' a corporation formed at my instance under the laws of
Maryland, by certificate duly recorded among the Records of
Baltimore County, my country place known as 'Clifton,' contain-
ing about three hundred and thirty acres, and all the shares of
the capital stock of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company,
whereof I shall die possessed, (except the stock known as pre-
ferred stock of said Company, upon which a dividend of six per
centum and no more is payable by said Company), and I rec-
ommend the said "The Johns Hopkins University' not to dispose
of the said capital stock, or of the stock accruing thereon by
way of increment or dividend but to keep the said stock and
increment, or dividend stock, if any, as an investment; and I
direct that the buildings, necessary for the purpose of the said
"The Johns Hopkins University,' shall be constructed out of the
money dividends as they accrue on said stock; and that the said
University and the trustees should maintain the said University,
afterwards, out of its receipts from scholars, and out of the
annual revenue derived from the devise and bequest hereby made,
without encroaching upon the principal fund. And I further
enjoin upon the said University, and the trustees thereof, the
duty of voting and representing the said stock with diligence,
zeal, and perfect fidelity to the trust I have reposed in them,
especially desiring that each and every trustee thereof will ab-
stain from all action which may tend to subordinate the Balti-
more and Ohio Railroad Company to any political influence or
management, and will at all times, use his or their influence or
power with the purpose of promoting its usefulness, and the
value of the stock of that company, which I have hereby be-
queathed. And I further request the trustees of the said Univer-
sity to establish, from time to time, such number of free scholar-
ships in the said University as may be judicious, and to distribute
the said scholarships amongst such candidates from the States
of Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina, as may be most de-
serving of choice, because of their character and intellectual
promise; and to educate the young men, so chosen, free of charge.”
APPENDIX B
REORGANIZATION PLAN OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF CHICAGO
THE UNIVERSITY SENATE
The University Senate shall consist of:
(a) The President; (b) the Vice President; (c) the Deans
=
H
169
of Faculties; (d) all professors of full rank in the Univer-
sity; (e) Clinical Professors serving as Chairmen of de-
partments, or as Deans of Schools, Divisions, or Colleges.
Its jurisdiction and powers are, among others, that they
shall have general legislative and administrative power over
all matters not specifically reserved to a Faculty.
THE GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD
The Administrative Board shall consist of:
(a) the President, the Vice-President, the Dean of Facul
ties, the Dean of Students and University Examiner,
and the Dean of the University Chapel. The Registrar
serves as secretary of the Board.
The Deans of all Schools, Divisions, and Colleges
whose faculties are constituted by the Statutes, the
Dean of Medical Students, the Director of University
Extension, the Chairman of Women's University Coun-
cil, and Director of the University Libraries, and the
Director of the University Clinics.
Its jurisdiction and powers are subject to the control of
Senate:
(a)
(b)
(b)
THE FACULTY
The Faculty of each Division shall consist of:
a.
The President.
b. The Vice-President.
To act in regard to all matters chiefly administrative
in character not specifically reserved to a Faculty.
To alter or reserve the action of any University Board
in any matter chiefly administrative in character.
e.
f.
C.
d. The Dean of the Division.
The Director of the University Libraries.
The Dean of Students and University Examiners.
Officers of Instruction.
g.
All persons, other than lecturers, above the rank of assistant,
who are appointed for at least one year and a part of whose
work for the current year is in a particular School, Division,
or College, shall be a member of its Faculty.
The Dean of Faculties.
Assistants who are appointed for at least one year to give
instruction in a particular school, Division, or College may
attend the meetings and take part in the deliberations of
its Faculty, but shall have no vote.
DEPARTMENTS
A department shall consist of members of any Faculty regularly
appointed to give intruction or carry on research in one of the
well-recognized divisions of study and investigation. Its powers
and organization shall be:
a.
The department as a body, subject to the approval of
the President and the Board of Trustees, and subject to the
general statutes of the University, shall determine from time to
170
time the general policy and work of the department and include
among its duties: (1) The duty of determining in consultation
with the Dean of the Schools, Division, or College in which the
department may be established the program of studies offered
by the department; the candidacy of students for higher degrees;
the examination of candidates for higher degrees; the filing of
theses for higher degrees; the assignment of rooms allotted to the
department; (2) The duty of editing the departmental journal, if
any be edited; of determining the policy of the departmental
library and of recommending the appropriation of the money
assigned to the department for books and apparatus; of providing
for the examination and acceptance of theses for higher degrees;
and of examining candidates for higher degrees.
b. The administration of the department shall be ordinarily
conducted through a chairman, who shall be appointed by the
President from the department to serve for not to exceed three
years, at the end of which period a new chairman shall be ap-
pointed or the same one reappointed.
C. In the case of a large department a secretary shall ordinar-
ily be appointed by the President from the department to aid
in the work of administration.
d. The chairman shall preside at all meetings of the depart-
ment. He shall be the executive officer of the department and
be charged with the power and duty of carrying out the regula-
tions adopted by the department. He shall be the official rep-
resentative of the department in all official communications with
the President and with other officers and boards of the Univer-
sity, and also in all departmental communications with students.
APPENDIX C
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
On December 13th, the following plan of organization of the
Graduate School was adopted by the Board of Trustees:
1. The Graduate School. All graduate work of Princeton
University in liberal studies, excluding technical and professional
studies, is included in the Graduate School.
3.
Functions of the Dean. The Dean shall be responsible
for the conduct of the Graduate School and shall have charge of
Graduate courses and work. He shall have oversight of the
Graduate students, fellowships, courses and degrees for Graduate
study, and of the graduate work done in Seminaries, Laboratories
and elsewhere in so far as it is of graduate character, excluding
technical and professional subjects. He shall consult the Presi.
dent of the University on all matters of importance affecting the
Graduate School and shall submit all proposed measures to the
President of the University and Trustees for their sanction. To
this end he shall be a member ex-officio of the Standing Com-
mittee of the Graduate School, and shall submit a written report
to the Committee at each stated meeting of the Board. He shall
also present the University Faculty an annual report showing
2. The Dean. There shall be a head of the Graduate School
styled the Dean to be elected by the Trustees of the University
and to hold office during the pleasure of the Trustees.
ĭ
171
the condition and work of the Graduate School for the preceding
year.
4. Faculty Committee. The Dean shall select a Committee
from the University Faculty to act as his advisers, and in the
absence of the President of the University shall preside at the
meeting of the Committee.
On February 5th, a special meeting of the Trustees'
Committee was held in New York. On motion of Dr.
Jacobus it was voted to recommend to the Trustees the
following substitute for Chapter VIII of the By-Laws:
1. The Dean of the Graduate School shall be a member
ex-officio of the Trustees' Committee on the Graduate
School, and Chairman of the hereinafter mentioned Com-
mittee of the University Faculty on such school. He
shall make a written report for that Committee to the
Trustees' Committee before the January and Commence-
ment meetings of the Board.
The administration of the Graduate School shall be in
the hands of a Committee of the University Faculty, to
be known as the Faculty Graduate School Committee.
They shall have supervision of graduate courses and
instruction, of the admission of students to the Graduate
School, of the studies of members of the Graduate
School of work leading to higher degree and the ex-
amination therefor, and of recommendations to the
University Faculty of appointments to fellowships and
graduate scholarships.
2.
3.
5.
They shall also have supervision over fellows, graduate
scholars and other graduate students, and in general
over all matters affecting the administration of the
Graduate School.
They shall conduct and administer the affairs of the
Residential Graduate Hall, and the Master of the Hall
shall be associated with the Committee as a voting
member in the administration of the Hall.
On April 8th, the Board of Trustees adopted the new
Chapter VIII of the By-Laws concerning the Graduate
School. (Minutes of the Board, April 8, 1909).
APPENDIX D
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
The action of the Board of Trustees establishing the Graduate
School was communicated to the University Faculty on April 16,
1909, and reads as follows:
RESOLVED, (1) That the division of the Graduate School
which has hitherto been designated the Graduate Depart-
ment shall after Commencement Day, 1909, be designated
the Graduate School.
172
(2) That the Faculty of the Graduate School shall consist
of those professors and assistant professors who are actively
engaged in supervising the work of graduate students as
members of special committees in charge of the major and
minor subjects;
(3) That this Faculty shall have exclusive jurisdiction over
all graduate work and advanced degrees;
(4) That legislation for the further organization of this
Faculty await the recommendations of the Faculty itself.
And the President is hereby authorized to convoke this
Faculty and request them to consider this subject and also
any matters relating to graduate work and advanced degrees
which they may deem expedient; it being understood, how-
ever, that all matters relating to graduate work and ad-
vanced degrees for the year 1908-1909 remain as hereto-
fore in the hands of the University Faculty;
(5) That the new Faculty hereby created shall on Com-
mencement Day, 1909, and thereafter, take over completely
from the University Faculty all its functions and powers
in relation to graduate work and advanced degrees and
shall thereafter have exclusive jurisdiction over such matters.
At its third meeting, May 27, 1909, the Faculty referred the
question of further organization to a committee. This committee
submitted a plan of organization on December 10, 1909. The
main features of the plan proposed were approved by the Faculty
and the Committee presented a formal report on March 11, 1910,
which, after slight amendment, was adopted by the Faculty in
the following form:
I.
For the convenient discussion of questions which chiefly concern
those engaged in related fields of work, and for the purpose of
electing representatives to the General Committee of the Graduate
School, the members of this Faculty are to be divided into five
groups, as follows:
A. Languages and Literatures.
C.
B. History, Political Science, Law, Philosophy, Education.
Mathematics, Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Geology
and Physical Geography.
D.
Biological Sciences.
E. Engineering, Architecture, Applied
Physical Sciences.
Each member of this Faculty will be requested to indicate the
group to which he desires to belong. In case the nature of the
work renders membership in two groups proper, this is to be
permitted.
II.
D
The General Committee of the Graduate School shall consist of
five members at large elected by the Faculty, and five members
elected by the groups, one member being elected by each group.
The Dean shall be ex-officio chairman of the General Committee.
The term of office of the members of the General Committee is
to be three years, the length of the term for the members first
elected to be arranged by lot after their election so as to make
the number retiring each year as nearly as possible equal. New
173
members of the General Committee are to take office on May 1.
The representatives of each group on the General Committee
shall be ex-officio chairman of that group.
It shall be the duty of the General Committee to pass upon
questions which do not involve a change of policy; to consider
such matters as may be referred to it by the Faculty; and upon
its own initiative to make recommendations to the Faculty re-
garding questions involving the interests of the Graduate School.
2.
3.
1. The Graduate Faculty shall be made up of all those approved
as qualified to give graduate instruction. Its chairman is the
Dean of the Graduate School. It shall meet at least three
times a year to discuss and pass upon matters relating to the
general educational policy of the Graduate School and to
recommend candidates for degrees.
Matters of Graduate School administration shall be vested
in the Dean and an Executive Committee.
6.
7.
8.
APPENDIX E
C.
d.
THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
MAY 19, 1914.
The Executive Committee shall consist for the present of
seven members, one from each of the following groups:
a. Social Sciences and Law
b.
Philosophy, Psychology and Education
Language and Literature
Medicine
g.
Agriculture
4. The members of the Executive Committee shall be appointed
annually by the President.
5. The Executive Committee with the Dean shall determine,
subject to the authority of the President and Regents, and
in accordance with any general regulations adopted by the
Graduate Faculty matters of curriculum, membership in the
graduate teaching faculty, expenditure of funds, admission
to graduate study and such other matters as usually relate
to the proper administration and development of graduate
work in the University.
Within each group represented in the Executive Committee
there shall be constituted a Committee, of not less than
three members, on graduate work, to whom may be referred
questions concerning qualifications of candidates for advanced
degrees, their program of studies and such matters as may be
referred to them by the Dean or Executive Committee. Mem-
bership in these group committees shall be determined by the
group, except in the case of medicine and agriculture. In
the latter the appointment shall be made by the Dean of the
Graduate School on nomination of the Dean of the College.
The member of the group on the Executive Committee shall
be ex-officio chairman of the group and a member of its com-
mittees.
е.
f.
Physical sciences, Mathematics and Engineering
Biological sciences
The Dean and Executive Committee may constitute from time
to time such other committees as may be deemed necessary.
174
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
As revised at a meeting of the Corporation,
held May 11, 1923.
(Originally adopted June 6, 1922)
APPENDIX F
ARTICLE I.
A school is hereby established as a special department of
Washington University to be known as the School of Graduate
Studies.
ARTICLE II.
The object of said School is to provide the needful facilities
for advanced and specialized education in the various fields of
human knowledge, so far as the resources of the University can
provide.
ARTICLE III.
Said School shall be under the direct control, as to its meth-
ods of instruction and the conduct of its affairs, of the Cor-
poration of Washington University.
ARTICLE IV.
1. The membership of the Board of Graduate Studies shall
be nine and its members shall have a tenure of three years. one-
third retiring each year. The retirement of the first Board shall
be by lot, the first three retiring at the end of the academic year
1923-24. The Board shall be appointed by the Chancellor.
2. The initiation of matters of educational policy of the
School of Graduate Studies shall be within the province of the
Faculty of Graduate Studies, or within the province of the Board
of Graduate Studies. The final determination of such policy
shall be solely within the province of the Faculty of Graduate
Studies, subject to the following provisions:
a.
C.
That no action regarding such policy by the Faculty
of Graduate Studies can be taken until it has received
from the Board of Graduate Studies a report on the
proposed policy.
b. That when a matter of educational policy has been
submitted by the Board of Graduate Studies to the
Faculty of Graduate Studies no essential alteration of
the proposed policy can be acted upon without being
resubmitted to the Board of Graduate Studies.
That when a policy, initiated by the Board of Graduate
Studies, is submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies
for action, members of said Faculty shall receive a
written statement of the proposed policy not later than
one week before the date announced for the meeting
of the Faculty.
175
ARTICLE V.
The Faculty of Graduate Studies shall be constituted as
follows: the heads of departments in the College, the Schools of
Engineering and Architecture, the School of Commerce and
Finance, all full time professors in the Henry Shaw School of
Botany, and the School of Medicine, full time professors in other
schools of the University as these schools become properly or-
ganized for graduate work leading at least to the Master's degree;
and in addition all members of the corps of instruction who are
giving graduate work, or who gave such work the preceding
year, and who hold the rank of at least Assistant Professor,
together with those whose active research shall be, in the judg-
ment of the Board of Graduate Studies, of such high order as
to warrant their appointment to the above Faculty.
ARTICLE VI.
The principal function of the aforesaid Faculty shall be to
discuss the Graduate interests of the University and to bring
changes or innovations with reference to the conduct of Graduate
work.
ARTICLE VII.
When in the judgment of the Corporation it is necessary,
the Corporation shall appoint a Dean of the said School of Grad-
uate Studies, who shall receive such compensation and hold office
for such period as the Corporation shall determine and direct.
He shall supervise and direct the work of said school, sub-
ject, however, to the control of the Corporation, and shall per-
form generally such duties as usually devolve upon the University,
preside at the meetings of the Faculty.
ARTICLE VIII.
The fees in the School of Graduate Studies shall be such as
the Corporation may determine from time to time.
ARTICYE IX.
The Board of Graduate Studies shall recommend to the
Corporation, through the Chancellor, candidates for all degrees
above the first taken in course.
1.
APPENDIX G
Report of Reorganization of the Board of
Graduate Studies
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
March 6, 1935
That the Trustees be advised to create a body to be known
as the Faculty of the Graduate School, in size from 75 to
125 members, authorized to perform the functions now
exercised by the Board of Graduate Studies and such
176
II.
III.
IV.
other functions as may from time to time be delegated
to it, and in general assume responsibility for the develop-
ment of research and graduate study in Northwestern
University.
That the President of the University, with the advice of
the Dean of the Graduate School, appoint the members
of this Faculty, subject to the following provisions:
A. That the Faculty be drawn from the faculties of
schools or colleges which have already placed the ad-
ministration of part or all of their graduate work
under the control of the Graduate School. If in the
future other schools become participants in the work
of the Graduate School, membership in the Faculty
of the Graduate School shall be open to properly
qualified members of their faculties.
B.
C.
E.
That so far as practicable membership in the Faculty
of the Graduate School be further limited to persons
who (1) have given tangible evidence of ability to
conduct productive research; (2) hold academic rank
of assistant professor or above; (3) give instruction
primarily for the graduate students.
D. That appointments to the Faculty of the Graduate
School be for three years, provided that this period
does not exceed the length of the appointee's univer-
sity appointments.
F.
That not more than two-fifths of the membership of
the Faculty of the Graduate School be drawn from
the faculty of any one school or college.
That any school which has not placed part or all of
its graduate work under the control of the Graduate
School, may, at its request, be represented by one
non-voting member on the Faculty of the Graduate
School.
That the Dean of the Graduate School and the Uni-
versity Librarian be ex-officio members of the Faculty
of the Graduate School.
That for the effective administration of research and grad-
uate study there be created from the members of the
Faculty of the Graduate School an Administrative Board
consisting of the Dean of the Graduate School and one
representative from each of the following schools and
divisions: Commerce, Dentistry, Education, Medicine,
Speech, Division I of the College of Liberal Arts, Division
II of the College of Liberal Arts, and Division III of the
College of Liberal Arts.
That if, in the future, schools of the University not till
then participating under this plan in the work of the Grad-
uate School, shall place the administration of part or all
of their graduate work under the control of the Faculty
of the Graduate School, one representative from each
school thus participating shall be added to the Adminis-
trative Board.
2
177
V. That the President appoint the members of the Adminis-
trative Board, with the advice of the Dean of the Graduate
School in consultation with the executive officer, or Com-
mittee on Graduate Studies, in the School or division
concerned.
VI. That appointments to the Administrative Board be for
one year.
VII.
That, when the organization contemplated in sections I-VI
inclusive of this report be made effective, the present
Board of Graduate Studies be dissolved.
APPENDIX H
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Reorganization of the Graduate School of
Arts and Sciences.
The Educational Council, at a meeting held May 8, 1935,
adopted the report of its committee on Policy, in which were
contained the following provisions relating to graduate studies
(here only briefly summarized):
1. The degree of Ph.D. shall be the only Doctor's degree
conferred by the University of Pennsylvania, except the tradi-
tional degrees in the field of Medicine.
2. The Ph. D. shall represent high scholarship, broad culture,
and evidence of independent and original work.
3.
The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences shall be reorgan-
ized so as to consist of the following subsidiary faculties:
The Humanities
The Physical Sciences
The Biological and Medical Sciences
The Social Sciences
4. Not all teachers now giving graduate instruction shall be-
come, automatically or by right, members of a Divisional Faculty.
5. A central body consisting of representatives from each of
the Divisional Faculties, elected for a term of years, shall, with
the Dean as chairman, function as a coordinating committee for
the school as a whole.
The Council also voted that the special committee be appointed
by the Provost for the purpose of working out the details essen-
tial to the institution of such a reorganization. That committee,
consisting of D. W. Bronk, S. W. Fernberger, J. R. Kline, W. E.
Lingelbach, H. S. Lukens, C. E. McClung, E. M. Patterson, Harold
Pender, A. H. Quinn, E. A. Singer, Jr., E. B. Williams, Thomas
Woody, and the Dean, presented its report to the Council on
November 22, 1935. Their report as then adopted follows.
PROCEDURE OF REORGANIZATION
From among the faculty-members authorized to give graduate
instruction at the time of reorganizaton, the Dean of the present
178
Graduate School shall select a provisional faculty of the reorgan-
ized Graduate School, assigning each faculty-member selected to
one or more of the four constituent Divisional Faculties.
At appropriate dates the Dean shall call seperate meetings of
the Divisional Faculties thus constituted. Each Faculty thus
assembled shall elect a Nominating Committee to select from
among the members of the Faculty three panels as folows:
1. A panel of six names, from which the Faculty is to elect
representatives in a council hereinafter provided for under the
title, Council of the Graduate School.
2. A panel of nine names, from which the Faculty is to
elect members of a committee hereinafter provided for under the
title, Executive Committee of a Divisional Faculty.
3. A panel of three names from which the Faculty is to elect
a chairman hereinafter provided for under the title, Chairman
of a Divisional Faculty.
At such time and by such procedure as the meeting may decide,
each Divisional Faculty shall elect from the panels submitted
by its Nominating Committee as follows:
From panel 1, three Councilmen to serve, one for three
years; one for two years: one for one year.
From panel 2, six Committeemen to serve, two for three
years; two for two years; two for one year.
From panel 3, a Chairman to preside for one year.
All officers elected as prescribed above shall enter immediately
upon the functions hereinafter attributed to their respective
offices.
I. The Divisional Faculty
MEMBERSHIP
(a) Changes in the personnel of each Divisional Faculty
may be made on recommendation of its Executive Committee as
provided in II, 2b.
1.
PERMANENT ORGANIZATION
(b) A group or individual applying for admission to a
Divisional Faculty shall address a request to the Chairman of that
Faculty. Consent of the Faculty addressed and approval of the
Council of the Graduate School is requisite for the admission of
an applicant to membership in a Divisional Faculty.
2.
JURISDICTION
(a) Each Divisional Faculty shall be autonomous in the
formulation of its own by-laws, subject to the regulations herein
provided.
(b) The by-laws of each Divisional Faculty shall provide
for an annual nomination and subsequent election analogous to
those prescribed for purposes of organization, at which election
all officers left vacant by the expiration of terms of service or
for their cause shall be filled.
To any office vacated before the expiration of the
term for which its incumbent shall have been elected, the Dean
of the Graduate School shall make an ad-interim appointment.
..
179
In case the normal tenure of the office thus filled should extend
beyond the current year, at the next annual meeting of the Divi-
sional Faculty the appointment shall be replaced by election for
the remainder of the term.
II. The Executive Committee
1.
MEMBERSHIP
The Executive Committee of a Divisional Faculty shall
consist of the Dean of the Graduate School, ex-officio, the Chair-
man of that Divisional Faculty, chairman, and six members elected
by the Divisional Faculty as herein before provided.
2.
JURISDICTION
(a) It shall pass upon all the questions and proposals
submitted to it by groups or individuals belonging to the Divisional
Faculty to which the Committee pertains.
(b) It shall prepare each year a list of those whom it
recommends for membership in that Divisional Faculty or its
teaching staff for the ensuing year. Subject to the approval of
the Dean and to the University Statutes, the names so recom-
mended by Divisional Faculties shall constitute the Faculty and
the teaching staff of the Graduate School for the year designated.
(c) It shall review all catalogue material submitted by
groups constituting the Divisional Faculty to which the Committee
pertains. Only such catalogue material as has the endorsement
of the Committee shall be transmitted to the Dean for his ap-
proval and subsequent publication.
(d) It shall make such reports to the Divisional Faculty
to which it pertains as the by-law of that Faculty may require
or its special action demand.
(e) The approval of an Executive Committee, subject
to such limitations as may be set by the by-laws of the Divisional
Faculty which it represents, shall be sufficient authorization for
putting into execution all plans and proposals whose operation
would affect only the Divisional Faculty to which the Committee
pertains.
III. The Council of the Graduate School
MEMBERSHIP
The Council of the Graduate School shall consist of the
Dean of the Graduate School, chairman, and twelve representa-
tives, three elected by each of the four Divisional Faculties as
herein before provided.
1.
2. JURISDICTION
(a) The Council of the Graduate School shall pass
upon all questions submitted to it by the Executive Committees
of the Divisional Faculties or by members of those Faculties.
It shall further perform such executive functions in the general
University interest as shall from time to time be delegated to it
by a majority vote of the Divisional Faculties, each Faculty voting
as a unit.
180
(b) The approval of at least a majority of the total
membership of the Council of the Graduate School is required
for putting into execution any plan or proposal of a Divisional
Faculty whose operation would affect other Divisional Faculties,
e. g., any proposal whose operation would imply a change in
either requirements for entrance to the Graduate School or re-
quirements for a degree conferred by the Gaduate School.
IV. The Chairman of a Divisional Faculty
The Chairman of a Divisional Faculty shall preside at all
meetings of his Divisional Faculty or of its Executive Committee
and shall perform such other functions as commonly pertain to
such an office.
V. Amendments
Amendment of this plan of organization may be made with
the approval of not less than two-thirds of the Divisional Faculties
at any time constituting the Faculty of the Graduate School,
each Faculty voting as a unit.
1.
2.
3.
APPENDIX I
Action taken at the meeting of the Board of Trustees,
August 11, 1938.
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
The Graduate School shall consist of (a) a Graduate Council,
(b) an Executive Board, and (c) a Dean.
The Graduate Council shall be composed of the President,
the Dean and twenty-five or more members of the University
Faculty to be appointed by the President in consultation with
the Dean. Each member of the Graduate Council except
ex-officio members, shall be appointed for a period of three
years and shall, for one year after the expiration of an ap-
pointment, be ineligible for reappointment. The Council shall
constitute the policy-making body of the Graduate School.
It shall lay down general regulations for the government of
the Graduate School, including requirements for degrees
offered, standards for admission, approval of graduate courses
and curricula, and programs of graduate students.
The Executive Board shall consist of seven members and the
Dean, who shall be ex-officio a member and chairman. Four
members of the Executive Board shall be appointed by the
President in consultation with the Dean, the first four to be
appointed for four, three, two and one years and thereafter
the member chosen each year to be appointed for four years;
and three shall be elected by the Council from its member-
ship. The four members of the Board to be appointed by the
Au
181
4.
5.
6.
President shall be members ex-officio of the Graduate Council.
The Dean shall consult with the Executive Board in the ad-
ministration of the Graduate School and in the disbursement
of Graduate School funds.
8.
The Dean of the Graduate School shall be appointed by the
Board of Trustees upon the recommendation of the President,
acting with the advice of the Graduate Council. The Dean
shall be the administrative head of the Graduate School with
the same general powers, duties and privileges that pertain
to the office of Dean in the several colleges. He shall also
preside at the meetings of the Graduate Council and of its
Executive Committee and of the Executive Board of the Grad-
uate School; make recommendations to the Council concern-
ing all such matters as are of primary importance in the
development of the graduate work of the University; serve
ex-officio as a member of the Administrative Council and, in
the absence of the President, preside at its meetings; present
candidates for graduate degrees to the President of the Uni-
versity and officially report upon the conditions and progress
of the Graduate School whenever called upon by the President
to do so.
The Dean of the Graduate School, after consultation with its
Executive Board, shall annually recommend to the Board of
Trustees through the President an adequate budget to provide
for the proper maintenance and development of graduate
work and research programs.
The Dean of the Graduate School shall be jointly responsible
with the Deans of the different colleges and the Chairmen of
the different departments for recommendations for appoint-
ment or promotions in rank or salary in departments in which
graduate work is offered.
7. The Dean of the Graduate School, with the advice of the
Graduate Council and in cooperation with the Chairmen of
the different departments offering work in the Graduate
school, shall be responsible for fixing the minimum qualifi-
cations for those members of departmental staffs who may
offer work in the Graduate School.
Since the Department is the unit of university organization
for instruction and research in a defined field of learnng,
the departments offering graduate work shall deal directly
with the Dean of the Graduate School in all matters related
to graduate work.
9. The Dean of the Graduate School shall advise with the Chair-
men of the Departments offering work in the Graduate School
concerning the duties and responsibilities of members of the
instructional staff concerned with graduate work and research,
with a view to adjusting teaching loads and research respon-
sibilities to facilitate the program of the Graduate School.
:
182

D
i
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
3 9015 06458 5667
AICI
¥

ANNA****