Gender and the Evolution of Normal School Education · 2013. 8. 2. · Gender and the Evolution of Normal School Education plored, as gender became a definingcharacteristic of these

�

Chara Haeussler Bohan & J. Wesley NullEducational Foundations, Summer-Fall 2007

Chara Haeussler Bohan is an assistant professor in the College of Education at Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia; J. Wesley Null is an associate professor of education at Baylor University, Waco, Texas.

Thehistoryofnormalschooleducationremainsanareaofstudythathasattractedrelativelylittleattentionfromeducationalhistoriansinrecentyears,althoughagrowingbodyof literature isemerging(see,Allison,1998;Goodlad,Soder,&Sirotnik,1990;Herbst,1991;Lucas,1997;Monroe,1952;Salvatori,1996).None-theless,earlynormalschoolsinNewEnglandandtheMidwest have received greater attention than thoseestablishedintheSouthwest.NormalschoolswerefirstestablishedandderivedtheirnamefromFrance.Theseinstitutionswereestablishedspecificallytoeducateandtrainteachers,andtheyquicklyspreadacrossEuropeandlatertotheUnitedStatesaspubliceducationblossomed.Thisresearchdetailsthenormalschoolnarrativeinthelate1800sandearly1900swhen“normals”primarilyservedastheonlymeansforwomenintheSouthwesttoachieveadvancededucation.Theintersectionbetweengenderandteachereducationatnormalschoolsisex-

Gender and the Evolutionof Normal School Education:

A Historical Analysis of TeacherEducation Institutions

By Chara Haeussler Bohan& J. Wesley Null

�

Gender and the Evolution of Normal School Education

plored,asgenderbecameadefiningcharacteristicoftheseinstitutions.Eventually,manynormalschoolsbecameuniversitiesthatexisttoday. Clearunderstandingsofnormalschoolsandteachereducatorsmakeenquiryintothisareadifficultinthecontemporaryworld,andhistoricalanalysisisevenmorecomplex.Thedeeplycontextualnatureof the teachingprofessionfurthercompoundsthestudyofnormalschools(Borrowman,1956).Themannerinwhichprospectiveteachershavebeeneducatedatparticularinstitutionsalwayshasbeenheavilyinfluencedbythespecificnatureoftheinstitutionswherethispracticetookplace.Atthesametime,however,variousstatesthroughoutthe20thcenturyadoptedstandardsforcertificationthatprospectiveteachersinparticularstateshadtoattainbeforeearningacertificatetoteach.Thus,programsfortheeducationofteachershavereflectednotonlythenatureofspecificinstitutions,butalsotherequirementsmandatedbystatedepartmentsofeducationacrossthecountry. Perhapsthemostimportantissuethatremainstobeinvestigatedinthestoryofnormalschooleducationisthequestionofgender.Inordertounderstandthedevelopmentofteachereducationmorefully,ahistoricalanalysisoftheconfluenceofgenderandteachereducationcurriculumatspecificnormalschoolsinTexaswasundertaken.Researchonnormalschoolcurriculumbetweentheyears1890and1930shedslightonthebroaderfieldofteachereducationasitiscommonlyunderstoodintheearly21stcentury.Acomparisontonormalschoolsinotherstateshelpstohighlightnationaltrends.Theteachereducationcurriculumatnormalschoolshasservedasafocusofinvestigation.Nevertheless,ChristineOgren(2005)notedinherworkonnormalschoolsthatthevoicesofthestudents,whocertainlyinfluencedthecurriculum,alsomustbeexplored.

Gender Morethananyotherfield,theprofessionofteachinghasbeenshapedbygenderforcenturies.Inthisresearchcontext,genderprovidesatheoreticalframeworktoanalyzeteachereducationinnormalschools.Comparisonsbetweenmenandwomenintherealmofearlyteachereducationinstitutesservetoilluminateunderstandingofthehistoryofeducation.Thisanalyticalframeworkisinformedbymanycontem-poraryhistoriansofeducationinthefieldwhohavehelpedtofurtherknowledgeoffemaleeducation(see,Blount,2005;Crocco,Munro&Weiler,1999;Gordon,1990;Rousmaniere,2005;Sadovnik&Semel,2002;Thorne,1995).Thefeminizationoftheprofession,especiallyinelementaryeducation,followingtheestablishmentofnormalschoolshasbeenwelldocumented(Amott&Matthaei,1991).Normalschools,whichdominatedelementaryteachereducationintheU.S.wellintothe20thcentury,enrolledanoverwhelmingmajorityofwomen.Thenormalschools,however,evolved.Oncetheybecamestateteacherscollegesandlaterregionalstateuniversities,theybegantoemployanincreasingnumberoffacultymembersfromawidevarietyofdisciplines.Theseprofessorsincludedmathematicians,historians,andphilosophers,forexample,andresearchbecameincreasinglyimportant. Thegenderednatureofthenormalschoolsfaculty—anditstransition—merits

�

Chara Haeussler Bohan & J. Wesley Null

detailedexploration.Howdidquestionsofgenderrelatetotheevolutionofteachereducationcurriculum?Towhatextentdidfacultymembersfromdisciplinesout-sideeducation,whowerehiredatvariousnormalschools,viewtheprofessionofteaching?Howdidquestionsofgenderrelatetotheevolutionofnormalschoolsintoteacherscollegesandlaterintoregionalstateuniversities?Thesequestionsarenoteasytoansweranddirectlyhighlighttheextremelygenderednatureoftheteachingprofessionitself(see,Carter,2002;Dzuback,2003;Eisenmann,1997;Gordon,1990;Sadovnik&Semel,2002;Weiler,1997). DespitethefactthatnormalschoolsservedasaprimaryavenueforeducatingwomenintheU.S.,normalschoolshavebeenneglectedinthehistoriographyofwomen’seducation.AccordingtoChristineOgren,historiansofwomen’seduca-tionhavetendedtofocusonthemoreprestigious,elitecollegesanduniversities(Ogren,1996).Yet,shenotesthatintheyearsbetween1880and1910,32to40percentofwomeninhighereducationattendednormalschools.Laterdemographicanalyseshaveestimatedthatnearlyhalfofthewomeninhighereducationattendednormalschools.Normalschoolspreparedstudentsforteaching,whichwasoneoftheonlyprofessionsavailabletoeducatedwomeninthelate1800sandearly1900s.Manyotherprofessions—forexamplemedicine,law,andbusiness—wereclosedtowomen,withtheexceptionofsupportiverolessuchasnurseorsecretary.Butteachingisviewedastraditional,ratherthananoccupationthatbrokegenderstereotypes.Hence,teachingisseeminglylessintriguingtohistoriansinterestedinwomenwhobravednewpaths. AsOgren(1996)andCarter(2002)pointout,however,teachingmayappearconventional,butoftenwomenteacherswerequiteradicalintheiractions.Crocco,Munro,andWeiler(1999)describewomenteachersinPedagogies of Resistance whoactedasagentsofchangeforthemselves,theirstudents,theirschools,andthesocietyatlarge.Duringthezenithofnormalschools,duringthelate1800sandearly1900s,womenteacherscomprisedmanyofthesuffragistswhoorganizedandadvocatedfortherighttovote.Indeed,SusanB.Anthony,LucretiaMott,andCarrieChapmanCatthadbeenteachers.Thediscriminationtheyfacedintheworkplaceservedasacatalystfortheirrecognitionoftheneedforwomen’spoliticalrights(Carter, 2002). Discrimination in the school work place acquired many forms,butmostprominentwasthediscrepancyinsalariesformaleandfemaleteachers.Women teachers inmanycitiesearnedone-third toone-fourth thepayas theirmalecounterpartsinthesamejob(Carter,2002).Althoughteacherscomprisedthelargestprofessioninthesuffragemovement,schooladministratorsoftendidnotsupportteacherinvolvementinthecause.Evensomeelitehighereducationinstitu-tions,suchasVassarCollege,intheearly1900simposedbansondiscussingandorganizingsuffrageactivitiesoncampus.LucyM.Salmon,aprogressivehistorianatVassar,facedreprimandfromtheschool’sadministrationforherinvolvementwiththesuffragemovement(Bohan,2004;Crocco&Davis,1999).Furthermore,someteachersconfrontedthegenuinethreatoflosingtheirjobsbecauseofsuffrageactivities.In1912,CatholicteacherAimeeHutchinsonwasfiredbecauseofher

�


participationinasuffrageparade(Carter,2002).AsCarter(2002)notes,teacheradvocacydidnotendin1920withthepassageofthe19thAmendment.Succeedinggenerationsofteachersfoughtforanendtomarriagebans,andlaterstruggledtogainmaternityrights(Carter,2002). InadditiontoexaminingcurriculaatparticularnormalschoolsintheSouthwest,whichpartakesinthetop-downapproachtohistoricalinvestigation,studentandfacultyvoicesareheardthroughtheirparticipationinschoolnewspapers,yearbooks,oralhistories,andletters.Examinationoftheextracurriculumiscriticalaswell,asFrederickRudolphhasexplained.Studentcreativityandextracurricularlearningserveaspowerfulforcesinthelifeoftheuniversity(Dennis&Kauffman,1966;Rudolph,1962).Furthermore,asOgren(2005)suggests,raceandclassweremorediverseatnormalschoolsbecauseofthenon-elite,“people’scollege”statusofnor-malschoolsinAmericansociety.NormalschoolstudentswerenottheprivilegedyoungwomeninBarbaraSolomon’s(1985)In the Company of Educated Women,butmoretypical,ordinaryfemalestudents.Ofcourse,Solomon’sworkisconsideredaclassic,butasLindaEisenmann(1997)notes,Solomon’s(1985)analysisislimitedincertainaspects.Forexample,shenotesanabsenceofdiscussionabouthowthefederalgovernmentinfluencedhighereducation(Eisenmann,1997).Oftennormalschoolswereviewedasespeciallyaccessibletolargenumbersofstudentsbecauseofconvenientlocationsandaffordableexpense.Forexample,inTexasduringtheearly1900s,statenormalschooltuitionwasfree,becauseitwassubsidizedbythestategovernment. Ofcourse,stateregulationofnormalschoolsmeantthatanimportantavenueforeducatingwomenwasinfluencedbythegovernment.MichaelApple(1986)hassuggestedthatstrongcontrolsexistedpreciselybecauseteacherswerepredominantlyfemale.InTexas,normalschoolenrollmentsbygenderreflectednationaltrends,andthemajorityofnormalschoolstudentsinthestatewerefemale.SinglesexfemalecollegesdidnotflourishintheSouthwest,astheydidintheNortheastandMidwestwhereeliteinstitutionsofhighereducationdeveloped,forexamplethesevensistercolleges.Therefore,normalschoolswereintegraltotheeducationofthemajorityoffemalesintheregion.Enrollmentsbygenderatdifferentinstitu-tionsvariedovertheyears;nevertheless,themajorityofstudentsatnormalschoolswerefemaleduringthe1880-1930timeperiod.Forexample,atSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchool,womencomprisedapproximately64percentofthestudentbodyin1904-05,almost76percentin1909-1910,and73percentin1919-1920(Ogren,2005;Southwest Texas State Normal School Bulletin [STSNSB],1919-29).InCalifornia,thenormalschoolinLosAngeles,whichbecametheUniversityofCaliforniaatLosAngeles,wassimilarlycomprisedofalargelyfemalestudentbody.In1930,72percentofthegraduateswerefemaleand28percentweremale.

State Context: Texas InTexas,debatesragedonwithregardtotheappropriatecurriculumforpro-

7


spectiveteachers.LikeotherSouthernandWesternstatesintheunion,theriseofteachereducationinTexascorrespondedwiththecreationofapublicschoolsystem.DuringReconstruction,manyNorthernpoliticiansmovedtoTexastoenactlawstheyperceivedtobenecessaryforthefurtherdevelopmentofeducation.OneoftheselawswaswhateducationalhistorianFrederickEby(1925)termedthe“RadicalSchoolLaw”of1878.Thislawmandatedahighlycentralizedsystemofpubliceducationforthestate.Althoughthelegislaturehadpassedalawin1854thatcreatedde jurepubliceducationinthestate,nosystemofpubliceducationinTexaswasestablishedde factountilReconstruction.Followingthepassageofthe“RadicalSchoolLaw”in1878,normalschoolsbecamenecessaryacrossthestate.Thenewpublicschoolsneededteachers.SamHoustonStateNormalInstitute,foundedwithmoneyfromthe George Peabody foundation in 1879, was the first of these institutions.Thesameyear,theStateNormalofTexasforColoredStudentsinPrairieView,Texas,whichhadbeenestablishedoriginallyasanAgriculturalandMechanicalCollege,wasconvertedtoanormalschool(Ogren,1996;Wilson,1986).ThePeabodyfund,establishedbywealthyNewEnglandmerchantGeorgePeabody(1795-1869),wasthemostinfluentialforceinhelpingtoestablishnormalschoolsinTexas.Aninitialendowmentofonemilliondollarseventuallygrewtoathreeandone-halfmilliondollarfund(Wilson,1986).AspubliceducationfloweredinTexas,moreteacherswerenecessary.Thus,othernormalschoolswerefounded(Ogren,2005). Texaswaslate,comparedwithotherstatesintheU.S., toestablishnormalschools.Inhis1851seminalworkonnormalschools,HenryBarnardtracedtheoriginofnormalschoolsinMassachusetts,NewYork,Pennsylvania,Connecticut,andMichigan.Thesestatesfoundednormalschoolsfortheeducationof“thefe-maleteachersofallherschools”sotheycouldbetrainedtoprovideaneducation“whichisfreetoallandpracticallyenjoyedbythechildrenoftherichandthepoor”(Banard,1851,p.3-5).Texassufferedfromaseriouslackofqualifiedandlicensedteachersinthemidtolate1800s.However,whenthegeneralagentofthePeabodyfund,Dr.BarnasSears,visitedTexasin1869,hefoundpoliticalchaosandcontroversysurroundingtheschoolsystem.Thus,headvisedagainstinvestment.By1879,despiteTexasGovernorRoberts’vetoofabilltoappropriatefundsfortheschoolsbecausetheywereinsuchbadcondition(heviewedspendingmoneyontheschoolsaswasteful),Searswasabletogarnersupportfortheestablishmentofanormalschool(Eby,1925;Wilson,1986).AfterSamHoustonStateandPrai-rieView,thenextpublicnormalschoolwasnotestablisheduntil1901.In1899,thestatehadauthorizedsupportfortwomorenormalschoolsatDentonandSanMarcos.In1901,thestateappropriatedfundsforNorthTexasStateNormalCol-lege(atDenton),andSouthwestTexasStateNormalCollege(atSanMarcos).Bytheearly1900s,normalschoolswerebuddingacrossthestate. ThelegislatureplayedanimportantroleinthegrowthofthenormalschoolmovementinTexas;thus,themovementwasperhapsmorecentralizedthaninotherstates.Inresponsetoasevereteachershortageinthestate,theTexaslegislatureappropriatedfundstobuildmorenormalschools(Eby,1925).Despitethethree

�


extentnormalschoolsandthefewprivatecollegesthatofferedprogramstopre-pareteachers,therestillwerenotenoughteacherstomeetthedemand.In1903,SouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolinSanMarcosopenedofficially.In1910,WestTexasStateNormalSchoolwasfoundedinCanyon.In1917,EastTexasStateNormalCollegeinCommercewasestablished,and,in1920,SulRossStateNormalSchoolinAlpinewascreated.Thesenormalschoolsremaininbusinesstoday,andallhavetransitionedtolargestateorregionaluniversities. Certainly,othernormalschoolswerecreatedthatsubsequentlywereforcedtoclosetheirdoors.In1896,forexample,The Texas School JournaladvertisedforCentralTexasNormalCollegeinTemple(Advertisement,p.156).CentralTexasannouncedthatstudentscould“enteratanytimeandselect”theirownstudies.Thecurriculumatsuchsmallschoolswasoftenpaltryandlackinginacademicrigor.Forexample,CentralTexasofferedcoursesthatfocusedonbusinessstudiesmorethanteacherpreparation.Coursesincludedelocution,music,short-hand,typewriting,businessandliterarystudies.EastTexasStateNormalinCommerce(1889)hadbeenaprivateenterprise,butwastakenoverbythestatein1917toavoidclosure.Notsurprisingly,somenormalschoolswereforcedtoclosetheirdoorsindefinitely.Thosewithstatesupportweremorelikelytosurvive. StatecontrolandcentralizationofteachingwasnotwithoutcontroversyinTexas.Stateauthorizationofteachingcertificatesmeantthatcountyboardsofexaminerswouldloseauthorityoverthelicensingprocessforteachers.Statelicensuremeantthattheteachereducationcurriculum,evenatprivateinstitutions,wouldbeaffected.In1896,aproponentofstatecontrol,A.S.Wertheim,advocatedabolishingthecountyboardsystemandinstitutingastateboardofexaminers.Hefoundmanyirregularitiesandproblemswiththecountysystem.Astatesystem,hebelieved,wouldhavemanybenefits.Oneadvantagewouldbeincreasedaccessibilityandmobilityof teachers throughout thestate.Anotherwouldbeuniformacademicrequirementsforteachersinthepublicschoolsystem.Athirdadvantagerelatedtocostandtheincreasedneedforteachers.Iftheexaminationscouldbepaidforoutofthestate’sgeneralfund,therebymakingtheexamcostfreeofchargetoap-plicants,moreprospectiveteacherscouldbeattractedtotheprofession.WritinginresponsetoWertheim,JoeShelbyRiley(1896)claimedthatifWertheim’sasser-tionsabouttheproblemswiththecountysystemweretrue,“thenamajorityofourteachers,countyboards,andcountyjudgesareliars,drunkards,andperjurers”(p.162-163).Riley(1896),however,believedthatalargemajorityofteachersinTexas“areuprightChristianmenandwomenandarewellqualifiedfortheirrespectivepositions”(p.162-163).Riley’sargumentswereinvain,however,astheteachershortageintensified,particularlyinruralareasofthestate,demandsonthestatelegislaturetosolvetheeducationproblemsincreased.1

State Certification Examinations TheTexasstategovernmentclearlygainedcontrolover thecertificationofteachersbytheearly1900s.Eveninthelate1890s,thestatecreatedexamination

�


questionsthatweretobeusedincountyexams.Thesequestionswererigorous.Theybelieassertionsthattheeducationofteacherslackedthoroughness.InhisanalysisofteachereducationinAmerica,ChristopherLucasnotedthatnormalschoolswereobjectsof“derision,suspicion,anddistrust”duetopoorteachingandintellectuallymeagercurriculum(Lucas,1999,p.30).SomeofthesubjectmatterquestionsontheTexasteachercertificationexaminationcoveredmaterialtaughtinhighschools,asteacherswereexpectedtodemonstratebroadknowledgeofmaterialtobetaught.Otherquestionsdemandedhigherlevelsofthinkingmoretypicalofcurrentuniver-sityeducation.Differentquestionswereaskedofteachercandidatesdependingonthelevelofcertificationsought.Thethreelevelsofcertificationwerecalledsecondgrade(lowestlevel),firstgrade(intermediatelevel),andpermanent(highestlevel). StateexaminationquestionsinFebruary,1896,includedquestionsonmethodsandmanagement,grammar,arithmetic,statehistory,spelling,writing,geography,physiology,composition,physicalgeography,civilgovernment,UnitedStateshis-tory,geometry,physics,mentalscience,moralscience,algebra,historyofeducation,Americanliterature,Englishliterature,generalhistory,chemistry,bookkeeping,solidgeometry,andtrigonometry.Samplequestionsrevealthebreadthoflearning,andthehighlevelofthinkingdemandedofteachercandidates.Forexample,inthesectiononmethodsandmanagementrequiredofallcertificationlevels,studentswereasked:

1.Statebrieflytherealaimsandpurposesofeducation.2.Namefourgoodqualitiesofthesuccessfulteacher.Explainthevalueofeach.3.Statereasonsfororagainstcorporalpunishment.4.Isformalgrammaraproperstudyforyoungchildren?Givereasonsforyouranswer.(Texas School Journal[TSJ],1896,p.168)

Thesectiononwritingdemonstratedboththehigherlevelandlowerlevelknowledgeexpectedofteachercandidates.Inthesectionongrammar,thefutureteacherswereaskedtonamethedifferentclassesofpronounsandtogiveexamplesofeachclass(TSJ,1896,p.168).Studentswereaskedtoexplaintheessentialsofgoodwriting,andtheyalsohadtoprovideaspecimenofpenmanship.Considerablefactualrecallofinformationwasexpected,inadditiontoanalysis,evaluation,andjudgment.TheUnitedStateshistoryquestionsdemonstratethevastamountofinformationtoberecitedandthenanalyzed:

1.NamefiveofthemostimportantpoliticalpartiesthathaveexistedintheUnitedStatessincetheDeclarationofIndependence.Nameoneoftheleadingprinciplesorpurposesofeach.2.NameandlocatethreeofthemostimportantbattlesoftheRevolution.Whyaretheseregardedasimportantbattles?3.DiscussbrieflytheKansas-Nebraskabill.4.WhenwasthebattleofManassasJunction,orBullRunfought?Whatwastheresult?(TSJ,1896,p.169)

Inscienceandmathematics,studentsweregivenproblemstosolve,termstodefine,

10


andprinciplestoexplain.Forexample,thephysicsquestionsrequiredforthefirstgradecertificateaskedprospectiveteacherstodothefollowing:

1.Definephysics,matter,molecule,atom,physicalchange.2.Statethelawsoffallingbodies.Howfarwillabodyfallin12seconds?Howfarwillitfallinthe8thsecond?3.Abodyon thesurfaceof theearthweighs3600pounds.Wouldadifferentweightinthesamebodybeshownifweightedwithapairofplatformscalesonamountainsixmileshigh?Why?(TSJ,1896,p.170)

Toearnapermanentcertificate,studentswereaskedrigorousquestionsaboutthehistoryofeducation,Americanliterature,Britishliterature,chemistry,geometry,andtrigonometry.StudentswereexpectedtotracethedevelopmentofthecommonschoolsystemandnormalschoolsintheUnitedStates,todiscussthecharacterandworkofHoraceMannandPestalozzi,andtoexplainRousseau’sideasoneduca-tion.CandidatesalsodiscussedthewritingsofCottonMather,WashingtonIrving,JohnLathropMatley,RalphWaldoEmerson,GeoffreyChaucer,RobertBrown-ing,SamuelJohnson,andLordTennyson.Finally,ingeometryandtrigonometry,studentshadtodemonstratetheirabilitytosolveproblemssuchas:

1.Inatriedralanglethesumofanytwooftheplaneanglesisgreaterthanthethirdangle.Demonstrate.2.Twoparallelopipedonswhichhavethesamebaseandsamealtitudeareequivalent.Demonstrate.3.ConstructthefunctionsofanangleinQuadrantIII.Giveallthesigns.Howmanyangleslessthan360°havethevaluecosineequalto+7/8,andinwhatquadrantsdotheylie?(TSJ,1896,p.171)

Certainly,thestateexaminationquestionsrevealthatteachercandidateswereexpectedtohaveabroadrangeofknowledge.Theseexaminationsalsoforcedprospec-tiveteacherstomasterlowerlevelandhigherlevelthinking—therangeofBloom’staxonomy—factualrecall,explanation,analysis,evaluation,andjudgment.

State Normal Schools Flourish Inmanyrespects,thenormalschoolsunderstudyreflectedbroadernation-widechangesinnormalschooleducation.Indeed,bureaucratization,standardization,andgenderplayedasimilarlysignificantroleinteachereducationthroughouttheUnitedStates.AcomparisiontoteachereducationinCaliforniais illustrative(Crocco,Munro,&Weiler,1999).InherstudyofCaliforniaeducators,CorinneSeedsandHelenHeffernan,Weilerfoundthatthesewomeneducators,whoworkedwithintheconfinesoftraditionalmale-dominatededucationbureaucracies,wereabletopromoteeducationalreform.Reformsincludedtheestablishmentofkindergartens,playgrounds,andteachertrainingschools.Inaddition,normalschoolsinCaliforniaexperiencedsimilartransitioninnames,degreesoffered,andstatus.Forexample,LosAngelesNormalSchool,foundedin1882,becametheSouthernBranchoftheUniversityofCaliforniain1919,andeventuallytheUniversityofCalifornia

11


atLosAngeles(UCLA)in1933.Theexpansionofdegreescorrespondedwiththetransformationfromnormalschooltouniversity.Theteacherscoursewasextendedtofouryears,andthefirstbachelorsdegreewasgrantedin1923(Crocco,Munro,&Weiler,1999).Agenderedhierarchydevelopedasthenormalschoolbecamepartoftheuniversity,andmanyprofessors,includingthepresidentofUCLA,disdainedteachereducation.AccordingtoOgren(2005),reformstoteachereducationbeganintheNortheastandMidwest,andthenwerefollowedintheWestandSouth.TheSouthwestmayhavebeenlasttodevelopteachereducationreforms.Arizona,the48thstate,officiallygainedstatehoodin1912,andTexas,althoughthe28thstatein1845,hadthelegacyofbeinganindependentrepublic. Despiteaprotractedtransitioninteachereducation,normalschoolsinTexasbegantoflourish.Inthe1880s,thesuccessofSamHoustonStateledstateauthori-tiestoorganizesummernormalinstitutesforteachersalreadyworkingtoincreasetheirknowledge(Wilson,1986).ThecurriculaofferedatthesummernormalswasapprovedbytheStateDepartmentofEducation.Instructionwasofferedinsub-jectstestedonthestateteachercertificationexaminations.Thesummernormalscontinuedforfiftyyears.Bothprivateuniversities,suchasBaylorUniversity,andpublicinstitutions,suchasSamHoustonState,heldsummernormalinstitutes. By the early 1900s, state control over the teacher certification process in-creased.In1911,the32ndlegislatureofTexasestablishedtheStateBoardofNormalRegents,whichwasvestedwiththepowerofcompletecontroloverthenormalschoolsofTexas(STSNSB,1921).TheBoardofNormalRegentsincludedtheStateSuperintendentofPublicInstructionandfourotherregentsappointedbytheTexasgovernor.Notonlydidstatecontroloverthecertificationofteachersincrease,butthestatewasinstrumentalinraisingthestandardsfortheeducationalattainmentofteachers.EntrancerequirementsweremadeuniformforalltheTexasnormalschools,thecourseofstudywasstandardizedandraisedfromthreetofouryears,andfivedistinctcurricula for teachereducationwere implemented(Eby,1925;Wilson, 1986).The five areas of specialization included agriculture, industrialarts,language,sciences,primarystudies,andart.Clearly,thestateexertedstrongcontrolovertheTexas’teachereducationcurriculum. In1913, the33rd legislature turnednormal schools into junior collegesbyauthorizingtheadditionoftwoyearsofworkofcollegerank.In1917,theBoardofNormalRegentsraisedthestandardsofstatenormalschools,onceagain,byendorsingtwoadditionalyearsofcollegework,therebyelevatingnormalschoolstostandardseniorcollegeswithfouryeardegreeprograms.Theexpansionofthenormalschoolcurriculumandcourseofferingstofouryearcollegeequivalencyenabledstudentsatnormalschoolstoearnbachelorofartsandbachelorofsciencedegreesineducation.In1917,the35thlegislatureauthorizedtheestablishmentoffourmorenormalschools:SulRossStateNormalCollegeinAlpine,EastTexasNormalCollegeinCommerce,StephenF.AustinNormalCollegeinNacogdoches,andSouthTexasStateNormalCollegeatKingsville(Wilson,1986).TheofficialopeningdatesforsomeoftheselaternormalschoolswasdelayedduetoU.S.entry

12


intoWorldWarOne.TheestablishmentofStephenF.AustinmarkedtheendofthenormalschoolmovementinTexas,andthebeginningofthetransitiontotheteacherscollegeera.StephenF.Austin,infact,wasopenedasaTeachersCollege.Itneverofferedthehybridhighschool/collegecurricularepresentativeofearlierTexasnormalschools. Normalschoolsofferedopportunitiesforfemalestudentstostudyandlearn.Thesepossibilitieswerenotavailableatsingle-sexmaleinstitutions.Moreover,ingeneral,normalschoolsincludedmorewomenontheirfaculty(Cotrell,1993).Forexample,AnnieWebBlanton,whobecamethefirstwomanstatesuperintendentinTexasin1918,hadbeenontheNorthTexasfacultyintheearly1900s.WhenBlantonarrivedinDenton,eightofher14colleagueswerewomen.Tobesure,asMaryAnnDzuback(2003)notedinherpresidentialaddresstotheHistoryofEducationsociety,“ThestoryofhighereducationintheUnitedStatesisastorythatcannotbeunderstoodwithoutthoroughattentiontogenderasthefundamentaldefiningcharacteristicofAmericaneducationalinstitutions,ideas,andpractices”(p.174). Thefeminizationoftheteachingworkforcewascriticaltotheevolutionandgrowthofteachereducationcurriculum.Inaddition,statesplayedacentralroleinthestandardizationandbureaucratizationof teachereducation, thusreducing theautonomyanddecision-makingabilitiesofteachereducators.TheseissueswillserveastheanalyticalcenterpieceforthisresearchthatexaminestheparticularteachereducationcurriculumandtheroleofgenderattwospecificinstitutionsthateducatedteachersinTexas.BothSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolandNorthTexasNormalSchoolwerepublicnormalschoolsfoundedneartheturnofthecentury.

Texas Normal College and Teachers’ Training Institute TheinstitutionknowntodayastheUniversityofNorthTexasatDentonservesasanoteworthyexampleofthemyriadwaysthatgenderimpactedtheevolutionofteachereducationcurriculumintheearly20thcentury.Foundedin1890asTexasNormalCollegeandTeachers’TrainingInstitute,NorthTexashadhumbleorigins(Rogers,2002).Thefirstclassesweretaughtintheupstairsroomsofahardwarestore.JoshuaC.ChiltonwasthemanresponsibleforbringingacollegetoDenton,Texas,aremotesouthwesternlocalewithtownboosterswhosoughttoaccommo-datetheincreasingpopulation.ChiltonhadbeenapublicschoolteacherinIndiana(LaForte&Himmel,1989;Cotrell,1993).2

Initsearlyhistory,NorthTexaswaspopularlyreferredtoas“TexasNormalCollege.”Theinstitution’sformal,originalnamewasTexasNormalCollegeandTeacherTrainingInstitute.Insomerespects,theinstitutionwasdividedwithre-gardtoitspurposefromthedayitwasfounded,oratleastduringitsearlylifeasaprivateinstitutionfrom1890-1901.ThefirstdegreesofferedatNorthTexaswereaBachelorofSciencedegree,aBachelorofArtsdegree,andaBachelorofPeda-gogydegree.Individualswhotookthesedegreesplannedeithertoteachinlocalelementarypublicschoolsorserveascountrysuperintendentsorperhapsevenas

1�


highschoolteachers.Studentswhodidnotwishtoremainattheinstitutionforanextendedperiodoftimecouldstayforashorterduration,forexampleoneyearorevenonesemester,toearnateachingcertificateratherthanadegree.DespitetheemphasisontheTexasNormalCollegeratherthantheTeacherTrainingInstituteaspectoftheinstitution,anemphasisonteachereducationcurriculumwasevidentinNorthTexas’earlyhistory. Likemanyearlyinstitutionsthatfocusedonteachereducation,NorthTexasprided itselfonbeing“moreaccessible,moredemocratic,andmore inclusive”(LaForte,1989,p.vii).Theschoolalsowasmoreaffordablethanotherstateandprivate universities of the time.An 1892 advertisement for the school boasted“ExpensesLowerthanElsewhere”(LaForte,1989,p.33).Tuitionforafourweekprogramwasfivedollars.Thesixweekcostwassevendollarsandfiftycents.Whenthestatetookovertheinstitution,tuitionbecamefree.Inordertoattractstudents,avarietyofcourseworkwasoffered,whichincludedOptionalorPreparatoryclass,Teachers’TrainingCourse,ScientificCourse,FullClassicalCourse,EngineeringCourse,CourseinElocutionandLiterature,BusinessCollegeCourse,Conserva-toryMusicCourse,andFineArts(Rogers,2002). Becauseofthepopularityofteachereducationandtheshortageofteachersinthestate,theschoolgrewquickly.Atitsfounding,185studentsenrolled.By1901theschoolhad781students.In1915,therewere1,883students,and,in1923,whentheschoolofficiallychangeditsnametoNorthTexasStateTeachersCollege,4,736werestudentsenrolled(LaForte,1989).Intheearly1900s,teachingwasoneofthefewprofessionsopentowomen(Gordon,1990;Solomon,1985).Betweentwo-thirdsandthree-fourthsofNorthTexas’senrollmentconsistedofwomenin1923.Moreover,two-thirdsoftheschool’sstudentbodyattendedinthesummer,whenmostteacherswererelievedfromtheirprofessionalduties. Despitethepreponderanceoffemalestudents,NorthTexasneversoughttobeasingle-sexeducationalinstitution,similartothesevensistercolleges,forexampleWellesley,Vassar,orMountHolyoke(see,Crocco&Davis,1999;Miller-Bernal,2000;Palmieri,1995).Indeed,thegrowthofwomen’scollegesdidnotimpedetheincreaseinco-educationalinstitutions,aswell(Solomon,1985).Inan1890–91announcementforitscourseofstudy,theadministrationatNorthTexasstatedthatsingle-sexinstitutionswerea“relicofmonasticism,”andthat“itisobviousthatthefriendsofco-educationare increasing”(LaForte,1989,p.31).NorthTexasremainedcommittedtoco-education,anditscurriculumreflectedthispromise.An1892advertisementfortheTeachersCourse,forexample,boastedthatthesubjectsembracedincluded,“Arithmetic,Algebra,Geometry,Rhetoric,Philology,ElementsofLatin,Physiology,PhysicalGeography,Botany,Zoology,Physics,ElementaryChemistry,U.S.History,TexasHistory,Psychology,SchoolManagement,CivilGovernment,andMenofLetters”(LaForte,1989,p.33). During its first eleven years,Texas Normal College andTeacherTrainingInstitutewasaprivate,Christianinstitution.AllfacultymemberswereChristian,andtheadministrationrequiredchapelexercisesfivedaysperweekforallstudents.

1�


TexasNormalCollege’steachereducationcurriculumcanbestbedescribedduringtheseyearsasincompletelydeveloped.Becausetheinstitutionhaddifficultyattract-ingenoughstudentsduringitsearlyyearsasaprivateentity,theschooladvertisedanextremelywidevarietyofcoursesandoptionsforstudents.Inotherwords,noteveryonewhoattendedTexasNormalCollegeduringthe1890splannedtobecomeateacher,althoughteachereducationservedasamajorcomponentoftheinstitution. Toaddresstheproblemofdecliningenrollmentandstrugglingfinances,TexasNormalCollegeteamedupwiththestateofTexasin1901.Inshort,thestategov-ernmenttookovertheinstitutioninordertohelpitsurvive.ResidentsofDentonpridedthemselvesintheirrecentlycreatedinstitutionofhighereducation,andtheyweredeterminedtofindawaytohelpitthrive.Politicalandfinancialsupportfromthestategovernmentintheformofpersuasionandstudentscholarshipshelpedtheschoolcontinue.Withthischangeinpower,however,stateofficialsbothchangedthenameoftheinstitution,andexpectedtheschool’smissiontofocusexclusivelyontheeducationofteachers.Thechangefrom“TexasNormalCollegeandTeacherTrainingInstitute”to“NorthTexasStateNormalCollege”in1901broughtmanychangestotheinstitution,includingthecreationofafullydevelopedteacheredu-cationcurriculum. An1898-99coursecatalogadvertisedaspecialphilosophicalapproachevidentintheteachereducationcurriculumatNorthTexas.Thecatalogexplained,“Muchofmethodinnormalteachingisobtainedintheregularclass,indeedthis is the life and genius of normal training...Constanteffortismadetoreveal,impressandinculcatethespiritandprincipleofapprovednormalmethods.Someofourbestteachersdevotetheirattentiontothisdepartment”(Texas Normal College Course Catalog, 1898-99,p.8).Thecatalog’sdiscussionofthis“lifeandgenius”andspiritoftheinstitutionrevealsthatfacultyrejectedtheideathat“whattoteach”shouldbeseparatedfrom“howtoteach”withintheteachereducationcurriculum.Indeed,thislanguageindicatesthatmanyfacultyatNorthTexasespousedtheintegrationistpedagogicalphilosophythatwasprevalentinmanynormalschoolsofthetime.3

Thisintegrationistphilosophyremainedwiththeinstitutionasitfocuseditseffortsontheeducationof teachersbeginningin1901.Withstatepoliticalandfinancialsupport,thenewNorthTexasStateNormalCollegedescribeditspurposeasa“schoolmaintainedfortheexclusivepurposeoftrainingandeducatingpersonsinthescienceandartofteaching.Thedistinguishingcharacteristicofanormalschoolisthefactthat,inadditiontoanacademiccourse,itoffersinstructionintheprinciplesthatunderliealleducation”(North Texas State Normal College, Course Catalog[NTSNCCC]1901-02).Beginningin1901,thestatedsuppositionoftheinstitutionwasthateveryonewhoattendedplannedtobeateacher.Othernormalschools,suchasSouthwestTexasState,hadsimilarmissions.NorthTexas’cur-riculumincludedcourseworkoftheliberalandprofessionaltypes,butexperientialcoursesinpracticeteachingwouldnotbedevelopeduntiltheearly1910s. The school opened in September of 1901 with 782 students (NTSNCCC,1902-03).AllstudentscompletedgeneraleducationcoursesthatincludedGram-

1�


marandComposition,U.S.History,Algebra,Geometry,andSchoolManagement.ThosewhoplannedtobecomelanguageteachersofonetypeoranothercompletedadditionalcourseworkinLatin,German,AncientHistory,HistoryofEnglishLit-erature,Shakespeare,HistoryofEducation,EnglishHistory,Civics,Virgil,Cicero,andGermanComposition andClassics.Studentswhowanted to teach sciencecompletedthegeneralrequirementsaswellasPhysicalGeography,Physiology,Psychology,andPhysics(NTSNCCC,1902-03).Otheravailablecoursesforpro-spectiveteachersincludedPrimaryandArt,Agriculture,HomeEconomics,andManualTraining.Thepurposeoftheteachereducationcurriculumwastoprovidestudentswithknowledgeofgeneralsubjectslikegrammar,composition,andU.S.history,andthenallowthemtospecializeinthevarioussubjectstheyplannedtoteachupongraduation.Asthe“lifeandgenius”advertisementdescribed,methodsof teaching thesevarioussubjectswere taughtat thesametimeas thesubjectsthemselves.Therewasnodistinctionbetweenliberalandprofessionalaspectsoftheteachereducationcurriculum.Thispatternofintegrationremainedwiththeinstitutionthroughoutthe1890to1920timeperiod. Ofthe782studentswhoenrolledforthe1901-02regularacademicyearatNorthTexas,503ofthemwerewomen,whichmeantthatthepercentageoffemalestudentswas64percent,andthemalestudentpercentagewas36percent(NTSNCCC,1902-03).Thenumberoffemalesrosesteadilyduringthenext10yearsastheinstitutionfocuseditseffortsincreasinglyontheeducationofteachers.Duringthe1910-1911regularacademicyear,460ofthe613NorthTexasStudentswerewomen.Thepercent-ageofwomenhadrisenfrom64percentin1902to75percentin1911(NTSNCCC,1911-12).Clearly,thedecisiontofocustheinstitutionspecificallyontheeducationofteachershadattractedmoreandmorefemalestudents. Despitethisoverwhelminglyfemale-dominatedstudentbody,however,thead-ministrationofthefacultyatNorthTexaswasmanagedbymen,althoughanumberofwomendidteachonthefaculty.Duringthe1901-02schoolyear,forexample,thefacultyincluded14members,eightofwhomwerewomen.Mostofthementaughtcourses that reasonablymightbe identifiedas typicallymale-dominatedsubjects,forexampleLatin,physics,chemistry,physiology,naturalhistory,math-ematics,andcivics.Evidenceofgenderalsocanbefoundinthecoursestaughtbythewomen,withmostofthemfocusingoncoursessuchasvocalmusic,primarymethods,elocution,literature,anddrawing.Despitetheirstrongpresenceonthefacultyandtheoverwhelminglyfemale-dominatedstudentbody,however,womenneverheldleadershiprolesinthehigheradministrationofNorthTexasthroughouttheperiodunderstudy.

The Practice School Duringthefirst20yearsofitsexistence,facilitiesforpracticeteachingdidnotexistatNorthTexas.Inthebattlethatensuedbetween1890and1920overteachereducationcurriculum,however,theestablishmentofpracticeschoolsbecameanimportanttoolfornormalschoolstouseastheyadvertisedthatoneprogramwas

1�


betterthananother.Manynortheasternnormalschoolsthroughoutthe19thcenturyhadcreatedpracticeschoolsinordertoprovidetheirprospectiveteacherswiththeopportunityto“tryout”someoftheirlessonsbeforebeginningtheircareersasteachers.Practiceschools,however,wereexpensivetoestablishandrun,somanystatelegislatureswerereluctanttocreatethemunlesstheyweredeemedabsolutelynecessary. By1912,twoothernormalschoolsinthestate,WestTexasStateNormalinCanyonandSouthwestTexasStateNormalinSanMarcos,alreadyhadfoundedpractice schoolson their campuses.Many faculty, administrators, and studentsviewedtheNorthTexasteachereducationcurriculumasoutdatedbecauseofthelackofapracticeschool, so theargument insupportof theestablishmentofapracticeschoolhadconsiderablepowerbytheearly1910s(Rogers,2002). PresidentW.H.BrucearguedinfrontofaStateSenateeducationcommitteein1913forfundstoinstitutetheCollege’sfirstpracticeschool.Despiteopposi-tion from legislatorswho thoughthewasasking foranaddition to the teachereducationcurriculumthatwassuperfluous,Brucewassuccessful.Thelegislatureauthorizedtheuseofapproximately$5,000tobuildtheschool,whichBruceandothersdesignedtoincludeninegrades.InJanuaryof1914,sevenofthesegradesbeganoperation.Theschoolenrolled100youngchildrenandemployedonedirec-torandfourteachers.Thepurposeofthepracticeschoolwastoprovideprospec-tiveteacherstheopportunitytotakepartin“theorganization,conduct,control,instruction,andotherdetailsofamodelpublicschool,andtogivestudentsactualpracticeandexperienceinteachingunderexpertdirection”(Rogers,2002,p.60).Childrenwhoattendedthepracticeschoolforallnineyears,throughthe9thgrade,couldenrollimmediatelyasfreshmenatNorthTexas.Thus,achildgrowingupinDentoncouldbeginschoolatthepracticeschoolasearlyastheageofsevenandgraduate13yearslaterfromNorthTexaswithabachelor’sdegreewithouteverleavingthecitylimits.

Gender and Teacher Education Curriculum at North Texas Theperiodfrom1890to1920wasavolatileoneforNorthTexas.Thecurricu-lumfortheinstitutionpriortoitsbecomingastateinstitutionin1901wasrelativelyunderdeveloped.Withstateinvolvementin1901,however,thesinglepurposeoftheinstitutiongaverisetoateachereducationcurriculumthatemphasizedliberalandprofessionalsubjects.Thefurtherevolutionofthecurriculumin1913toincludeanexperientialcomponentresultedinthecreationofacourseofstudythatwassimilarinstructuretootherteachereducationinstitutionsacrossthecountry.Likeothernormalschools,genderalsoplayedacentralroleintheinstitution’sdevelopment.Duringthe1901debateoverstateinvolvement,forexample,anumberofDentonbusinessmenarguedagainsttheideabecausetheythoughtbringinganormalschooltotownonlywouldbringwomen.Consequently,afemale-dominatedpopulation,theythought,wouldnotbringthekindofindustrialeconomicdevelopmentthattheysought(Rogers,2002).Thebusinessmenweresoconcernedaboutbringing

17


economicdevelopmenttotheirtown(aswellasconcernedthattheproposedstatenormalschoolwouldnotdoso)thatby1905theyestablishedaseparateinstitution,originallycalledtheCollegeofIndustrialArts.Thisindustrialcollegedidnotlast,butthedesiretobringyoungmenratherthanyoungwomentoDentonprovidesaglimpseathowgenderaffectedhighereducationinDentonduringthistime. EvenwithinthelargelyfemalepopulationatNorthTexasStateNormalSchool,ahierarchyofimportantsubjectsdeveloped.Theinstitutionalwaysincludedapri-marydepartmentwhichsoughttograduateprimaryschoolteachers,but,likeothernormalschoolsaswellasschoolsofeducationwithinuniversities,theevolutionofteachereducationcurriculummarginalizedtheroleofprimaryteaching.Othercourseswithinthecurriculumcarriedmorestatusandprestigewithinthelargercommunity.Clearly,upwardmobilitymeantprogressingfromprimaryteachertoelementaryteachertohighschoolteachertoprincipaltocountysuperintendentand,perhaps,allthewaytouniversityprofessorofarespecteddisciplineratherthanaprofessorofpedagogy.Consideringthisevolutionfromtheperspectiveofgenderilluminatestheextenttowhichteachereducationcurriculumhasbeendominatedbymenforatleast150years.

Southwest Texas State Normal School Teachereducationcurriculumcertainlywasaffectedbygenderissuesandcentral-izedstatecontrolatSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchool,aswell.The26thlegislaturehadpassedanactin1899establishingSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchool.Notuntil1901,whenthe27thlegislatureappropriated$25,000initsfirstsessionand$20,000initssecondsession,toerectbuildings,wastheprocessofcreatingthestate’sfourthnormalschoolrealized(Announcement of the Southwest Texas State Normal School, September 9, 1903-May 17, 1904[ASTSNS],1903).Tenyearsearlier,the23rdleg-islaturehadallowedteachersholdingdiplomasfromfournormalschools,includingCoronalInstitute,whichwasaprivateinstitutionlocatedinSanMarcos,toteachinthestateduringgoodbehavior.CoronalInstituteceasedexistence,butSanMarcoswasestablishedasasuperiorlocationforteachereducation. WhenSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolopened itsdoors for thefirstschoolyearin1903,17facultymemberswereledbyPrincipalThomasG.Harris.The17facultymembersatthenewnormalschoolinSanMarcostaughtavarietyofsubjectsincludingEnglish,Mathematics,Music,History,Physics,Chemistry,PrimaryWork,Reading,PhysicalCulture,German,Civics,Geography,Drawing,Latin,BiologicalSciences,andPenmanship(ASTSNS,1903).Thefacultysoughtthoroughnessandaccuracyofscholarship,butlimitedthecurriculumtothefieldofnormalschoolwork,andgave“nopretenseofacademictraining”(ASTSNS,1903,p.10).Thestatedpurposeoftheschoolwaswritteninthefirstbulletinsuccinctly.“This isaNormalSchool,establishedfor theeducationof teachers”(ASTSNS,1903,p.9-10).Studentsweretorememberthattheschoolwas“notauniversityorevenacollege,”andfurthermore,theinstitutiondidnot“hopetogivestudentsauniversityorcollegeeducation”andwhilefacultymayhopestudentssee the

1�


advantagesofadvancededucation,SouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolcouldnot undertake such an “endeavor itself ”(ASTSNS,1903, p. 10).The objectiveofthenormalschoolatSanMarcoswasstrikinglysimilartothestatedpurposeestablishedatNorthTexas,whichalsodeclaredthatthenormalwasneitheracol-legenorauniversity,butcreatedforthespecialtrainingofteachers(Eby,1925).Lucas(1999)assertsthatthe“blurryidentity”ofnormalschoolsand“disputedpurpose”plaguedteachereducation(p.28).InTexas,however,thenormalschoolmissionwasdeeplypowerful,especiallyatNorthTexasandSouthwestTexasState(Lucas,1999).Nonetheless,thetypicalnormalschoolcurriculumintheearly1900sremainedahybridofhighschoolanduniversitylevelstudies. WhenSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolopenedin1903,thecompletecourseofstudyincludedthreeyearsofwork.Thefirstyearwascalledfreshman,thesecondwascalledjunior,andthethirdwascalledsenior.Studentscouldapplytoanyofthedifferentyearsdependingupontheirqualificationsandthecertificationtheysought.Completionofthefreshmancourseledtoasecondgradecertificate,validforteachinginTexasschoolsforthreeyears,completionofthejuniorcourseledtoafirstgradecertificate,validforsixyears,andgraduationfromtheseniorcourseledtoateachingcertificatethatwasvalidforlife(ASTSNS,1903).Studentswererequiredtobe16yearsoldtogainadmission,andtheyhadtopledgetoteachinapublicschoolforasmanysessionsasattended.Inaddition,Texasresidencywasmandatoryandnotuitionwascharged.AlthoughSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchooldidnothavedormitories,studentsresidedinnearbyboardinghouses.TheStateBoardofNormalRegentssubsidizedtheboardfeeforaprescribednumberof scholarship students (two in1903/04)—an indicationof support for teachereducationandthedesperateneedforqualifiedteachersinthestate. ThemissionofSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolwasto“prepareworthyteachersfortheschoolsofTexas”(ASTSNS,1903,p.23;Meyer&Null,2004).Teacherswereexpectedtopossessuntiringenergyanddedication,asonlymenandwomenwhowelcomedhardworkwere“worthytobeadmittedtoranksofthegreatbrotherhoodofteachers”(ASTSNS,1903,p.23).Infact,studentsweretoldexplicitlyinwritingthattheyshouldnotenterthenormalschooliftheydesiredtostudylaw,medicine,theology,orevengeneraleducation,asthecurriculumsuitednonebutthosepreparingfortheprofessionofteaching. Overtheyears,thecurriculumbroadened.Thenumberoffacultyincreasedtomeetthedemandsofagrowingstudentbody.Theadministrationoftheschoolremainedmale-dominatedwhenC.E.Evans,whohadearnedamastersdegreefromtheUniversityofTexasatAustin,becamethePresident.By1912,30individualscomprisedthefaculty(The Normal School Bulletin, [NSB],1913).Mostfacultymembersheldbachelorsdegrees,butsomehadearnedmastersdegrees.Themis-sionoftheschoolremainedsimilartothatestablishedatitsfounding:

Efficient teachersareessential togoodschools;normalschoolsareneeded toassure an adequate supply of such teachers. Proficiency in teaching requiresbroadscholarship,insightintoschoolsneeds,andprofessionalskill.Theexcellent

1�


academiccoursesofthenormalschoolgivethoroughandliberalscholarship;thestrongpedagogic schoolgivesclear insight into schoolproblems; the trainingschoolappliestheacademicandprofessionalknowledgeintheschoolroomsoastogiveskillinteaching.(NSB,1912,p.10)

By1912, the curriculumoffered atSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolcomprisedfouryearsofstudy,andafter1914nothreeyeardiplomasweregranted.Theterminaldiplomaofferedwassimilartoapresentdayjuniorcollegedegree.Completionofthenormalschooldegreeallowedacandidatetotransfertotheju-niorclassofauniversityorcollege.Thecurriculum,therefore,remainedahybridbetweenhighschoolanduniversitystudies.Studentsselectedfromfivedifferentgroupsofcourses,similartopickingamajor.Thefiveareasofstudyconsistedof(1)Agriculture;(2)IndustrialArts;(3)Languages;(4)Primary,ElementaryandArts;and(5)ScienceandMathematics(NSB,1912).TheStateBoardofNormalRegentsfosteredchangesindegreesand,therefore,thedevelopmentofacurricu-lumthatequaled“juniorcollegestatus”wasauniformtransformationamongthenormalschoolsinthestate.Governmentbureaucracyclearlyinfluencedteachereducationcurriculum. By1917-1918,furthersignificantchangesinthelifeoftheSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolwereapparent.Firstandforemost,thenormalschoolatSanMarcosbecameanormalcollege.Administrativeofficers,faculty,andstudentbodyallincreasedinnumber.C.E.EvansremainedthePresident,butassistinghiminadministrationwereaDeanofWomen,Mrs.LillieT.Shaver,aSuperintendentoftheTrainingSchool,twolibrarians,andasecretary.TheadditionofaDeanofWomenpositionachievedadministrativeleadershipforafemaleforthefirsttimeatSouth-westTexasState,andalsorevealedaconcernforthelargelyfemalestudentbody.Theopeningofschoolleadershippositionsintheearlydecadesofthe20thcenturyoccurredthroughouttheU.S.tosucharemarkableextentthatthedecadehasbeencalleda“goldenage”forwomenschooladministrators(Blount,1998).Unfortunately,theriseofwomenineducationalleadershiproleswasfleeting,assubsequentdecadeshavewitnesseddeclineinthepercentageoffemaleeducationaladministrators. ThenumberoffacultyatSouthwestTexasStatecontinuedtorise.Ofthe43facultymembers,12heldmaster’sdegrees,13heldbachelor’sdegrees,andallsixfacultywhoworkedattheTrainingSchoolearneddegreesfromnormalschoolsor teachers colleges (NSB, 1917).The faculty had become increasingly bettereducated,atleastwithrespecttothedegreestheyheld.Moreover,ahierarchyofsubjectsbecameevident,andsomecoursesweretaughttypicallybyfemalesandothers remained male-dominated. For example, in 1917, the home economicsdepartmentcomprisedofthreewomenfaculty,whereasthemathematicsfacultyincludedthreemalesandonefemale. The broadening of the curriculum and enhancement of degree offeringscontinued.Diplomaswereofferedinsevenareas,asHomeEconomicsandHis-tory/Englishhadbeenadded.Beginningwiththe1917-1918schoolyear,thefirstfouryearcollegedegreewasoffered,whichledtoabachelor’sdegreeineducation.

20


Again,thestatewascriticaltothetransformationofthecurriculum.In1917,theBoardofNormalRegentsraisedthestandardsofallstatenormalsbyauthorizingtwoextrayearsofcollegestudies,therebymakingnormalschoolsequivalenttostandardseniorcollegesthroughoutthestateandnation(NSB,1921).Onceagain,stateauthorityreducedteacherautonomywithrespecttotheteachereducationcur-riculum.ThestateexertedfurtherinfluenceoverthenormalsbecauseallteachingcertificateswereissuedbytheStateDepartmentofEducation.

The Training School ThetrainingschoolatSouthwestTexaswasoneoftheearliestinthestate.By1918,theSanMarcoscampuscomprisedsixbuildings,includinganewlyerectedTrainingSchoolfacilityatacostof$85,000.Tuitionandbooksremainedessen-tiallyfree(NSB,1919).Thefacultybelievedthatatrainingschoolwascriticaltostudentsuccessinteaching,anditsestablishmentmeantthattheteachereducationcurriculumatSouthwestTexasincludedliberaleducation,professionaleducation,andanexperientialcomponent.Thecatalogstatedthatthetrainingschool“bearsthesamerelationtotheprofessionaltrainingofteachersasalaboratorybearstothetrainingofscientists…”(NSB,1917,p.94).Theschoolwasorganizedwithsixgrades,threeintheElementaryDepartmentandthreeintheJuniorHighSchool.Inaddition,amodelruralschoolwashousedwithinthetrainingschool.Super-visorsguidedtheworkofstudentteachers,whowererequiredtosubmitlessonplanstoteachersinadvanceofteachinglessons.Eachgradeinthetrainingschoolhadspecificlearninggoals.Forexample,inthirdgradearithmetic,“studentsaredrilledtocountbytwos,threes,fours,sixes,andsevens;alsointhemultiplicationanddivisiontables,includingthesevens.Longdivisionisnotattempteduntilthelatterpartoftheyear”(NSB,1917,p.98).

Gender and the Southwest Texas State Curriculum Despiteanintenseemphasisontheeducationofteachers,bythe1919-1920academicyear,theschooloffereditsfirststudiesoutsideoftheeducationprofes-sion.Abusinessadministrationcurriculumwasadded,whichincludedcoursesinshorthand,bookkeeping,accounting,auditing,andcommerciallaw(NSB,1919).Offeringcoursesoutsidetherealmofeducationstudiesclearlysowedtheseedsforaneventualtransitioninthefocusoftheuniversity.Furthermore,suchcurriculumchangesultimatelycontributed tosignificantchanges ingendercomposition inthelongterm.Astheschooltransitioned,curriculumofferingsbroadened,andtheinstitutionceasedtobeaplacethatprimarilyeducatedfemales. Theimportanceofeducatingwomeninanormalschoolenvironmentshouldnotbeunderestimated.AsOgren(1996)notes,normalschools“fosteredaprofessionalspiritinwomen”(p.192).AlthoughsomeoftheearlyteachertrainingcurriculaatnormalschoolsthroughouttheU.S.mayhavedeservedcriticism,bythetimeTexascreatednormalschoolsthecurriculawaswell-establishedandhighlycentralized.

21


Despitestateencroachmentontheautonomyofteachereducatorsandteachers,manyfemalestudentsclearlyweretaughttobereflective,thoughtful,andactivistteachers,evenifmoststudentsdidnotviewthemselvesasradical.Ogren(1996)foundapoemthatSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchoolstudentCarrieHughstonwrotein1905whichevidencedcontemplativeandradicalthought.Hughstonwrote,“Forineveryteachers’fieldofbattle,Inthebusyworkoflife,Weofthehardshipsmustnotprattle,ButbeNormals in the strife!”(Ogren,1996,p.192). Yet,in1920theavowedpurposeoftheSanMarcosnormalschoolremainedsteadfastlytheeducationofteachers.Callingitself“ASchoolforTeachers,”thebulletinproclaimed that“theatmosphereof thenormal school ischargedwithprofessionalspirit;thenormalschoolmagnifiesthecallingoftheteacher”(NSB,1917,p.10).The1921-1922bulletinstatedthatitwas“theprimaryfunctionofanormalschooltotrainteachersforserviceinthepublicschoolsofaState”(Normal College Bulletin,1921,p.9).Enrollmentfiguresfromthetimeperiodreflectthefact that themajorityofstudentswerefemale,andcourseofferingsalsoreflectthesecircumstances.Forexample,in1919-1920ofthe567studentsenrolledatSanMarcos,only154weremale.Thatsameyear,theStateBoardofNormalRegents,withtheapprovaloftheStateDepartmentofEducation,approvedacourseofstudyinvocationalhomeeconomicswhichhadbeenauthorizedbytheSmith-HughesAct.TheHomeEconomicsdepartmentclearlyattractedalmostallfemalestudents,asevidencedfromphotographsofhomeeconomicsstudentsworkingindomesticsciencekitchensandstandingoutsidetheirhomeeconomicsbuilding(NSB,1917;NSB,1913).Thecreationofahomeeconomicscurriculumforteachersrevealsthateventhefederalgovernmentexertedinfluenceoverthecurriculumofferingsatnormalschools,inamannerthatalsoimpactedgendercomposition. Theascendancyofdomesticscience,aswellasmanualtraining,intheteachereducationcurriculumhadimportant,ifunintendedconsequences.Indeed,Tyack,Lowe,andHansot(1984)claimthatalthoughschoolsmayappear“moreegalitarianthananyothermajorinstitution”uponcarefulexaminationonemayfind“manysubtlediscriminationswithintheclassroomandtheschoolbutalsoasetoflargelyunintendedconsequencesofregardingpublicschoolingasaclass-blindenterprise”(p.172).Clearly,theriseofdomesticsciencecurriculumwasa“stepbackward”as“statenormalschoolsbegantomoveawayfromfosteringintellectualisminfemalestudents”(Ogren,1996,p.284). By1920,educationalhistorianFrederickEbyobservedthatnormalschoolshadbroadenedthescopeoftheirworkandhadbecomeregularcollegesforthetrainingofteachers.Yet,inbecomingcolleges,theoriginalmissionofnormalschoolserodedgradually.Nolongerwasthenormalschoolcurriculalimitedstrictlytoteachereducation.Ahierarchyofcourseofferingsdeveloped.Furthermore,theexpansionofthecurriculaultimatelyledtoachangeingendercompositionatSouthwestTexasState.Asnormalschoolstransformedintoteacherscollegesandlaterintolargestate/regionaluniversities,theyceasedtobeinstitutionsthatprimarilyeducatedfemalesorthatprimarilyeducatedteachers.Whiletheseformernormalschools

22


retainsomeoftheirpopulistoriginstoday,theslowescalationintuitionoverthe20thcenturyalsohasmadetheseinstitutionsmoreelitistthantheyhadbeenintheirformativeyears.Yet,thesenormalschoolswerethefoundationofmanyinstitutionsofhighereducationacrossthenation.Theyhadbeguntoimitateotherinstitutionsthatneverhelduptheeducationofteachersastheironlypurpose.

Conclusion Theexaminationofnormalschoolcurriculawithaparticularfocusontheissueofgenderraisessignificantquestionsforeducationalhistoriansaswellasfor thosewhoeducateteachers.Onepoint thatbecomesevidentwhencompar-ingthesestoriesistheinfluenceoftheexpansionofpubliceducationonteachereducationcurriculum.WithouttheProgressive-erapublic-spiritednessthatgaverisetothecreationofcommonschools,thecreationofnormalschoolcurriculumprobablywouldneverhaveoccurred.Moreover,asthedemandforpubliceduca-tionincreased,theneedforteachers,obviously,increasedaswell.Areasonableconclusiontodrawfromthisphenomenonisthatastrongconnectionexistsbetweenconcernsforthecommongoodwithinsocietyasawholeandtheextenttowhichinstitutionsemphasizeteachereducationcurriculum.Statedanotherway,increasedindividualism,privatization,anddestructionofpubliceducation,aswellaspublicinstitutionsgenerally,onlycanproduceanegativeaffectoncurriculafortheeduca-tionofteachers.Ifeducationisnotviewedasapublicgood,thentheestablishmentandperpetuationofteachereducationcurriculumisseriouslytroubled. Inaddition,genderinfluencedthedevelopmentofteachereducation.Thein-stitutionsofhighereducationinthisstudyultimatelyhadlittleincentivetoteachthosestudentswhowereviewedtobelowestontherungofprestige,specificallythefutureteachersofprimaryandelementaryschoolchildren.Theinstitutionsinthisstudyeventuallymarginalizedtheircurriculafortheeducationofprimaryandelementarystudents.Themovementtogarnerprestigerequiredtheseinstitutionstomovetowardtheeducationofhighschoolteachers,toencourageeducationalresearch,andultimatelytobroadenthecurriculumtoincludeareasofstudynotrelatedtoeducation.Consequently,theinstitutionsbegantomoveawayfromtheeducationofprimaryandelementaryschoolteachers. Thepowerandprestige,bothwithintheseinstitutionsandbeyond,onlycouldbefoundduringthistimebyfollowingmoremale-dominatedfieldssuchaseducationalpsychology,business,science,andadministration.Asaresult,highereducationde-emphasizedsocietalrolesthatweredominatedbywomen.Theleastpopularconcernwastheteachingofwomen,morespecificallytheteachingofwomenwhowantedtoteachyoungchildren.Therewasnopowerinemphasizingthisvirtue.AccordingtoCrocco,Munro,andWeiler(1999),thehistoryofwomenandeduca-tionhasparalleledthatofmeninmanyrespectsbecausebothweresubjectedtotheincreasedbureaucratizationresultingfromlicensing,certification,hierarchicalworkingconditions,andstandardizedteachereducationcurriculum.Yet,theynotethat“Asspecializationproceeded,womenweretypicallyrelegatedtolowerrungs

2�


oftheoccupationalladder…increasinglyworkingformeninsubsidiarycapaci-tiesthatallowedlessscopefordecisionmakingandautonomy”(Crocco,Munro,&Weiler,1999,p.1).IntheSouthwest,theinfluenceofgenderupontheteachereducationcurriculumwasprofound.Untilthe“goldenera,”onlymalesservedasadministratorsat thenormal schoolsanddepartmentsofpedagogy included inthisstudy.Thesuccessoffemaleeducationalleadershipinthe1910swasterriblyshort-lived, as males continued to hold most administrative roles in educationthroughoutthe20thcentury. Furthermore, the nature of the curriculum offered reflected the impact ofgender.Theearlyteachereducationcurriculumwasintellectuallyrigorous,despitethehybridnatureofhighschoolanduniversityofferings.However,statelicens-ingofteachersforcedcurriculumchanges.Ahierarchicalstructureintensifiedincoursesofstudyduringthetimeperiod.Asatechnicianapproachtoeducationalstudyexpanded,coursessuchasmanualtraininganddomesticscienceenteredthecurriculum.Separationbygenderintensifiedwiththedevelopmentofsuchcourseofferings. Furthermore, the integration of educational studies with the variousotherdisciplinesdisappeared.Today,teachereducationinstitutionsareoverwhelm-ingfemale, justasnormalschoolshadbeenin the late1800sandearly1900s.However,teachereducationisoftenasmall,marginalizedcomponentofalargerresearchuniversity.Thesingle-purposeofeducatingteachersandthefosteringofaprofessionalspiritinwomenhasbeenlost.Thepopulistoriginsanddemocraticsentimentshavedisappeared,justasfreetuitionhasbecomearelicofthepast.OnlybyrecapturingthisspiritcantheeducationofteachersforthechildrenofAmericaonceagainthrivewithintherapidlychangingcontextofhighereducation.

Notes 1Interestingly,asimilarteachershortageproblemexistsinthestateofTexasatpresent,andonceagaincontroversyoverthelicensingofteachersisacentralpointofdebateasameanstosolvetheshortage.Indeed,recentproposalstochangethelicensingrequirementsofteachershavebeenthefocusofintensestatewidedebate.TheStateBoardforEducatorCertificationhasconsideredaproposaltoeliminateeducationcourserequirementsandallowcandidateswithbachelor’sdegreessimplytakethestateexaminationinordertobecomecertifiedteachers.Ratherthanaddressthetruecausesofthecurrentstateteachershortage,suchaslowpayanddifficultworkingconditions,thelegislaturehasconsideredreducingteachercertificationrequirementsasameanstoalleviatethecurrentteachershortage. 2CotrellidentifiesChiltonasaMichiganeducator.HewasfromMichigan,buthadtaughtinIndiana. 3Forarichdiscussionofintegrationistpedagogicalphilosophyasitrelatedtonormalschoolsandteacherscolleges,seeWilliamS.Learned,WilliamC.Bagley,etal.,The Profes-sional Preparation of Teachers for American Public Schools(NewYork:CarnegieFoundationBulletinNo.14,1920),128-247.

ReferencesAllison,C.B.(1998).Teachers for the South: Pedagogy and educationists in the University

2�


of Tennessee, 1844–1995. NewYork:PeterLang.Amott,T.,&Matthaei,J.(1991).Race, gender and work: A multicultural economic history

of women in the United States.Boston:SouthEndPress.Announcement of the Southwest Texas State Normal School, Sept. 9, 1903-May 17, 1904.

(1903).Austin,TX:VonBeockmann-JonesCo.Antler,J.(1987).Lucy Sprague Mitchell: The making of a modern woman.NewHaven,CT:

YaleUniversityPress.Apple,M.(1986).Teachers and texts: A political economy of class and gender relations in

education.NewYork:Routledge&KeganPaul.Barnard,H.(1851).Normal schools, and other institutions, agencies, and means designed

for the professional education of teachers. Hartford,CT:Case,Tiffany&Co.Blount,J.(1998).Destined to rule the schools: Women and the superintendency.Albany,

NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.Bohan,C.H.(2004).Go to the sources: Lucy Maynard Salmon and the teaching of history.

NewYork:PeterLang.Borrowman,M.L. (1956).The liberal and technical in teacher education: A historical

survey of American thought. NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Carter,P.A.(2002).“Everybody’s paid but the teacher”: The teaching profession and the

women’s movement. NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Cottrell, D. M. (1993). Pioneer woman educator: The progressive spirit of Annie Webb

Blanton.CollegeStation,TX:TexasA&MPress.Crocco,M.S.,&Davis,O.L.J.(Eds.).(1999).‘Bending the future to their will’: Civic

women, social education, and democracy.Lanham:MD:Rowman&Littlefield.Crocco,M.S.,Munro,P.,&Weiler,K.(1999).Pedagogies of resistance: Women educator

activists, 1880-1960.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Dennis,L.E.,&Kauffman,J.K.(Eds.).(1966).The college and the student.Washington,

DC:AmericanCouncilonEducation.Dzuback, M. A. (2003). Gender and the politics of knowledge. History of Education

Quarterly, 43(2),171-195.Eby, F. (1900). The reconstruction of the kindergarten. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,

ClarkUniversity.Eby,F.(1925).The development of education in Texas. NewYork:Macmillan.Eisenmann,L.(1997).Reconsideringaclassic:Assessingthehistoryofwomen’shigher

education a dozenyears afterBarbaraSolomon. Harvard Educational Review, 67,689-717.

Evans,C.E.(1927).Duplicationinstateinstitutionsofhigherlearning.Texas Outlook XI 30-31.

Goodlad,J.I.,Roger,Soder,R.,&Sirotnik,K.A.(Eds.).(1990).Places where teachers are taught.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Gordon,L.D.(1990).Gender and higher education in the progressive era.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversity.

Herbst,J.H.(1991).And sadly teach: Teacher education and professionalization in American culture.Madison,WI:UniversityofWisconsinPress.

Labaree,D.F.(1997).How to succeed in school without really trying: The credentials race in american education.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.

LaForte,R.,&Himmel,R.(1989).Down the corridor of years: A centennial history of the University of North Texas in photographs 1890-1990.Denton,TX:UniversityofNorthTexasPress.

2�


Learned,W.S.,&Bagley,W.C.(1920).The professional preparation of teachers for American public schools(BulletinNo.14ed.).NewYork:CarnegieFoundation

Lucas,C.J.(1999).Teacher education in America. NewYork:St.Martin’sPress.Meyer,R.,&Null,J.W.(2004).WorthyteachersfortheschoolsofTexas:Anoverviewof

thehistoryofSouthwestTexasStateNormalSchool.American Educational History Journal, 31,87-94.

Miller-Bernal,L.(2000).Separate by degree: Women students’ experiences in single-sex and coeducational colleges.NewYork:PeterLang.

Monroe,W.S.(1952).Teacher-learning theory and teacher education, 1890-1950. NewYork:GreenwoodPress.

The normal school bulletin.(1912). 1(4).Austin,TX:AustinPrintingCo.The normal school bulletin. (1913).Southwest Texas State Normal School, 11th Annual

Session, 1913-1914(Vol.2).Austin,TX:VonBeockmann-JonesCo.The normal school bulletin.(1917).(Vol.6).SanMarcos,TX:StateNormalSchool.The normal school bulletin. (1919). (Vol. 8). San Marcos,TX: SouthwestTexas State

NormalCollege.The normal school bulletin. (1921). (Vol. 10). San Marcos,TX: SouthwestTexas State

NormalCollege.North Texas State Normal College course catalog.(1901-02).Denton,TX:Universityof

NorthTexasatDentonArchives.North Texas State Normal College course catalog.(1902-1903).Denton,TX:Universityof

NorthTexasatDentonArchives.North Texas State Normal College course catalog.(1911-1912).Denton,TX:Universityof

NorthTexasatDentonArchives.Null,J.W.(2004).A disciplined progressive educator: The life and career of William Chandler

Bagley. NewYork:PeterLang.Ogren,C.(1996).Education for women in the United States.UnpublishedDissertation,The

UniversityofWisconsin,Madison,WI.Ogren,C.(2005).The American state normal school. NewYork:Palgrave.Palmieri,P.A.(1995).In adamless eden: The community of women faculty at Wellesley.

NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.Rhodes,J.L.(1959).The life and times of Frederick Eby.UnpublishedDissertation,The

UniversityofTexasatAustin,Austin,TX.Riley,J.S.(1896).Countyboardofexaminers.Texas School Journal 14(5),162-163.Rogers, J.L. (2002).The story of North Texas.Denton,TX:UniversityofNorthTexas

Press.Rousmaniere,K.(2005).Citizen teacher: The life and leadership of Margaret Haley.Albany,

NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.Rudolph, F. (1962). The American college and university: A history.Athens, GA:The

UniversityofGeorgiaPress.Sadovnik,A.,&Semel,S.F.(2002).Founding mothers and others: Women educational

leaders during the progressive era.NewYork:Palgrave.Salvatori,M.R.(1996).Pedagogy: Disturbing history, 1819-1929. Pittsburgh,PA:University

ofPittsburghPress.Solomon,B.(1985).In the company of educated women.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversity

Press.Texas Normal College course catalog.(1898-99).Denton,TX:UniversityofNorthTexas

atDentonArchives.

2�


Thorndike,E.L.(1906).The principles of teaching based on psychology. NewYork:MasonPress.

Thorne,B.(1995).Gender play: Girls and boys in school.NewBrunswick,NJ:RutgersUniversityPress.

Tyack,D.,&Hansot,E.(1982).Managers of virtue: Public school leadership in America, 1820-1980.NewYork:BasicBooks.

Tyack,D.,Lowe,R.,&Hansot,E.(1984).Public schools in hard times: The great depression and recent years. Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Weiler,K.(1997).Reflectionsonwritingahistoryofwomenteachers.Harvard Educational Review, 67,635-657.

Whitley,S.H.(1928).Texasteacherscollegesandruralschools.Texas Outlook, XII, 67.Wilson,G.(1986).Music teacher training in the normal schools and teachers colleges of

Texas, 1879-1949.UnpublishedMastersThesis,BaylorUniversity,Waco,TX.Woyshner,C.,&Gelfond,H.S.(Eds.).(1998).Mindingwomen:Reshapingtheeducational

realm.Harvard Educational Review, 30.

Documents

Gender and the Evolution of Normal School Education · 2013. 8. 2. · Gender and the Evolution of Normal School Education plored, as gender became a definingcharacteristic of these