fers fundamentally from general education. The former is related primarily to individual demands and controlled by professional conditions; hence it stands quite apart from higher education in the broad general sense. For this reason professional training for women, whether offered in separate schools or in the same schools with men, is an index of the growth of liberal sentiments in our country rather than, like coeducation, the outcome of democratic impulses.

Reference has already been made to the early efforts of women to secure medical training. It is a story of heroic perseverance against desperate opposition, and even persecution, and for a long time every advance in this respect was a victory over prejudice and selfishness. The efforts of women to secure training in law or theology have been less urgent than in the case of medicine, and the advance in respect to the former is consequently less noticeable. All orders of professional training are, however, now open to women in the United States, and they form an ever-increasing proportion of the total number of professional students. The following statistics show the status of professional schools with respect to the admission of women and the extent to which they were availing themselves of the provision in 1902:

The majority of the professional schools included in the above tabulation are situated in the North Central and Western States. The former division leads also in respect to the number of women students, excepting in the case of law, as is shown by the following ratios:

Per cent of women students in each geographical division.

The opening of professional schools to women has naturally been accompanied by the opening of the professions themselves, a matter of some social and economic importance. On account, however, of the small number of women engaged in professional practice the apprehensions expressed in certain quarters of a general disturbance of family or other normal conditions from this cause appear to be groundless. Meanwhile, because of the growing complexity of life and the demand for expert skill in dealing with social problems, especially in the great centers of population, the services of women learned in medicine, hygiene, and kindred subjects, familiar with the legal relations and restrictions of employers and laborers, or trained for the philanthropic, civic, and reformatory work that scientific sociology promotes and that even modern theology recognizes as part of its legitimate field, are becoming every day more and more indispensable to the public welfare.

*

*

*

*

The review of public education in the United States here presented reveals an inward coherency stronger than that which comes from mere external authority or formal organization. At the basis of the whole work is the conviction expresseć by Washington that knowledge contributes "to the security of a free constitution *by teaching the people themselves to know and value their own rights to discriminate the spirit of liberty from that of licentiousness, cherishing the first, avoiding the last, and uniting a speedy but temperate vigilance against encroachments with an inviolable respect to the laws." So long as education is made an exclusive privilege this diffused intelligence as to rights and duties is impossible; hence that impulse toward universal instruction of which coeducation is but one sign. This deep import of what has been sometimes regarded as a crude expedient of pioneer life was clearly set forth by Doctor Harris in his report already referred to. “The demand of women for equal advantages in education with men," he says, "is not a temporary demand arising out of the sentimentalism incident to the epoch, but only an index of the social movement that underlies our civilization." The particular mode by which this equality shall be secured will doubtless be determined in the future, as it has been in the past, by circumstances of time and place. At present the choice of the people by an overwhelming majority is that of the open door to all schools and colleges without distinction of sex. The practice derives new force from its steady advance in Europe as the old feudal forms of society pass into oblivion.

Whatever modifications of this policy may hereafter be favored among us, it is certain that they will never impair the principle of equality, which is precious to our people, nor will they be imposed upon any class of the people except by their voluntary preference.

The history of coeducation in this country reflects so clearly the impulse from which it has arisen and the principle by which it is sustained that it seems quite unnecessary to rehearse in this survey the arguments for and against the policy. In the final analysis the latter reduce to individual cases, but so far as these deserve attention in an educational scheme they can readily be met by the elective system. This system, like coeducation, is only a phase of the movement for making education in its full extent the common privilege of our people. Both are conducing the former by its liberalizing influence, the latter by its humanizing spirit-toward that higher but half unconscious ideal of education as an instrument for the perfection of democratic society which has haunted the minds of men for a hundred years.

SEGREGATION AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO (CONDENSED FROM STATEMENT BY

PRES. W. R. HARPER).

The proposition, adopted by the trustees October 22, 1902, briefly stated, is as follows: To make provision in the development of junior college work (equivalent to freshman and sophomore college classes) as far as possible for separate instruction for men and women upon the basis of extending equal privileges to both

sexes.

It does not mean that one policy is contemplated for women and another for men. In the general discussion much has been said of the so-called "segregation of women." As a matter of fact, nothing has been proposed concerning women that does not apply to men.

It does not mean that those who advocate the proposition desire to see the policy extended to any work outside of junior college work. Three important points are to be recognized in opposition to such extension: (a) The fact that women are being admitted in all leading institutions to the privileges of graduate and higher

ED 1903-68

college work; (b) the fact that in Rush Medical College, which is practically a part of the University of Chicago, the classes of instruction have been opened to women, this action having been taken within eighteen months; and (c) the fact that it would be impossible, for financial reasons, to duplicate most of the courses of instruction in the senior college and graduate schools, although such a possibility might exist in the case of professional work.

The plan does not involve two separate faculties or special rules and regulations for women as distinct from men. The work, as heretofore, will be under one faculty, at the head of which will be a single administrative officer with assistant deans. The chief administrative officer of the junior colleges will be responsible for the work with women as well as for that with men. Rules and regulations for both men and women will be made by the same faculty. It is not intended that the women of the junior colleges will be taught by instructors who are, for the most part or exclusively, women.

The proposition does involve an arrangement by which the courses of instruction in the junior colleges (elective or required) now given in several sections shall be offered, some exclusively for men and others exclusively for women.

It proposes an arrangement by which courses now repeated in successive quarters may be restricted during one quarter to women and during another quarter to men.

It proposes a continuation of the separation which has already taken place in chapel assembly, with possibly an extension of it to the division lectures.

It permits coinstruction in those courses offered to junior college students for which the registration is not sufficiently large to warrant division on an economical basis—for example, for the present one-third of all the courses offered to junior college students, roughly speaking, will be offered to men. one-third to women, and one-third will be open to both men and women.

It makes necessary the provision of separate class rooms and laboratories, just as now separate accommodations are arranged for work in physical culture. Officers of instruction who teach the junior college courses will divide their time with approximate equality between men and women.

The proposition guarantees the freedom of women in the university to enjoy all the privileges of the university and take up residence in the proposed women's quadrangle or in the present women's halls at their pleasure.

The conditions with which the University of Chicago has to deal in furnishing equal opportunities to men and women differ from those under which coeducation has thus far been tested. Little attention has been given to this fact. Three factors in particular are not found in precisely the same combination elsewhere: (a) Urban location.-No coeducational institution which is likely to have an equal number of junior college students in the near future is in a large city.

(b) Number of students.-Coeducation has been in operation, as a rule, with smaller bodies of students than we must provide for, and the numerical ratio of men to women has differed from that which is certain to prevail in the future. (c) Youth of students.-Until very recently the young women who went to college, and especially those who went to coeducational colleges, have represented a higher average of maturity and fixity of character than is to be expected when it becomes as much the rule in families above a certain level of competence for the daughters to go to college as for the sons, or even more so. Our junior college students are sure to average younger than those of institutions to which a great city population is not immediately tributary.

(For full statement see report of President Harper, 1904, pp. xcvii-cxiii.)

Status of foreign universities with respect to the admission of women.a

a From replies to a special inquiry issued by the English department of education in 1897, revised by later information.

Trinity College (Dublin) has just sanctioned the admission of women.

In one case the position of women students seems to be more strongly differentiated than in the other two.

LITERATURE OF COEDUCATION.

The Report of the Commissioner for 1900-1901 presents an extended bibliography of coeducation (Chap. XXVIII, pp. 1310–1325).

A large part of this material is of an ephemeral, fragmentary nature, repeating in various forms facts and opinions on the subject current at the date of publication. In the following selected bibliography the purpose has been simply to cover the history of the subject as set forth by those who have been personally familiar with its progress, together with opinions as to its practical effects based upon scientific considerations or authoritative experience.

The brief notes accompanying in some instances the titles of articles and books referred to indicate their general tenor.

ANGELL, JAMES B. Shall American colleges be open to both sexes? Maine Jour. Ed., 1871, p. 264; Mich. Teacher, 6: 193; R. I. Schoolmaster, 17: 265.

Considers and answers arguments against coeducation in higher institutions, fortifying
his support of the policy by testimony from other college presidents.

ANGELL, JAMES A. Some reflections upon the reaction from coeducation.
Sei. Mo., 62: 5.

Pop.

Comprehensive and judicial discussion of the entire question.

BARNARD, FREDERICK AUGUSTUS PORTER. Should American colleges be open to women as well as to men? A paper presented to the 20th annual convocation of the University of the State of New York. Albany, 1882. Reprinted from the proceedings of the convocation, pp. 141-160.

Discusses objections against admitting women to the colleges for men and presents arguments in favor of the action.

Expediency of receiving young women as students at Columbia College. Rep. of the President, 1879.

BARNARD COLLEGE. Relations with Columbia University. Circ. of Inf., 188990: 4. Report of the Acting Dean, 1900: 281–282.

See also Report of the Acting President of Columbia College, 1889: 16; also Report of the President of Columbia University, 1901: 7-8.

BLAKE, SOPHIA JEX. A visit to some American schools and colleges [including Oberlin, Hillsdale, and Antioch, with remarks on coeducation]. London, 1867. Describes conditions in coeducation colleges of the United States, with incidental references to English opinion and practice.

BOLTON, SARAH KNOWLES. Higher education of women in Cambridge University, England. Educa., 2:553.

Women in the same college with men [Adelbert College]. Jour. Educa., 20:379.

Of historical interest.

BOSTON. School committee. Majority and minority reports of the special committee on the subject of coeducation of the sexes. Boston, 1890. 8°. [School document No. 19.] Reprinted in An. Rept. U. S. Bu. Education, 1891-92, pp. 814-838. Also, in part, in An. Rep. U. S. Bu. Education, 1900-1901, chap. xxviii, pp. 1250-1267, 1281-1283.

Reviews the history of separate high schools in Boston and presents a great body of expert testimony in favor of mixed schools.

BRACKETT, ANNA CALLENDER, editor. Education of American girls. New York, 1874. 8.

Thirteen essays by representative women, embodying the results of extended observation and experiment in respect to the education of girls. A reply to Dr. Clarke's Sex in education.

BRONS, B. Ueber die gemeinsame Erziehung beider Geschlechter an den höheren Schulen. Mit Rücksicht auf thatsächliche Verhältnisse, hauptsächlich in den Vereinigten Staaten, Skandinavien und Finland. [Deutsche Zeit- und StreitFragen.] Hamburg, 1889.

BROOKS, EDWARD. Supplementary report to the board of public education (Philadelphia) on coeducational high schools. 1902.

CLARKE, EDWARD H. Sex in education; or, A fair chance for the girls. Boston, 1873. 12°.

Considers the subject in the light of clinical experiences.

CRICHTON-BROWNE, Sir JAMES. Sex in education. Educ. Rev., 4: 164.

Discusses in particular significance of difference between men and women in respect to brain weight.

DE GARMO, CHARLES. Differentiation in the higher education of women. Educ. Rev., 25: 301.

Favors larger opportunity for specialized courses of instruction for women. DRAPER, ANDREW S. Coeducation in the United States. Educ. Rev., 25: 109. Argues that the policy is overwhelmingly American and essentially democratic. DWIGHT, TIMOTHY. Status of women at Brown University, An. Rep., of President,

1893.