Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T05:40:01.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Professions in Process: Changing Relations Between Historians and Educators, 1896–1911

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2017

N. Ray Hiner
N. Ray Hiner*
Affiliation:
History and Education at the University of Kansas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1884 “A small band of zealous young scholars fresh from German seminars” organized the American Historical Association “to propagate and give new direction to ‘American history and history in America.’” In one sense, these self-conscious professionals institutionalized a fundamental element of nineteenth-century thought; they shared with many Americans a deep commitment to historicism and its two central tenets: the belief that all human life is in a process of continual growth and transformation and the related conviction that facts and events can be explained only by reference to earlier facts and events. In a century in which change and process were bywords, “the historical method” was a highly respected thought tool. “To know a thing properly,” as William Torrey Harris expressed it, “we must study it in its history.” The study of history satisfied an almost compelling psychic need of nineteenth-century Americans to reexperience time, to analyze it, to capture it conceptually, and thereby in a personal way to control it. They found great psychological comfort in tracing a modern institution or trend to its very roots. It should be no surprise, then, that a profound sense of the continuity of human experience, “an historical mindedness,” was a cherished goal in an age so characterized by discontinuity. No surprise, either, that history was the first of the social sciences to be organized on a national scale.

Type
Progressivism Revisited
Information
History of Education Quarterly , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , Spring 1972 , pp. 34 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © 1972 by New York University 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Van Tassel, David D., Recording America's Past: An Interpretation of the Development of Historical Studies in America, 1607–1884 (Chicago, 1960), p. 171.Google Scholar

2. The meaning given here to historicism is based in part on a discussion by Morton White in Social Thought in America: The Revolt Against Formalism (Boston, 1957), pp. 11–13. For a somewhat different approach, see Meyerhoff, Hans, “History and Philosophy: An Introduction,“ The Philosophy of History in Our Time (Garden City, N. Y., 1959), pp. 9–18.Google Scholar

3. Harris, William Torrey, “A Course of Study from Primary School to University,“ The Addresses and Journal of Proceedings of the National Educational Association, 1876 (Salem, Ohio, 1876), p. 61. (These volumes are referred to in subsequent notes as NEA Proceedings with the appropriate year).Google Scholar

4. The American Economic Association was established in 1885, the American Anthropological Association in 1902, the American Political Science Association in 1903, and the American Sociological Society in 1905. See Small, Albion, “Fifty Years of Sociology in the United States, 1865–1915,“ American Journal of Sociology 21 (May 1916): 774–76; and Stocking, George W., “Franz Boas and the Founding of the American Anthropological Association,” American Anthropologist 62 (February 1960): 1–7.Google Scholar

5. See Adams, Herbert Baxter, The Study of History in American Colleges and Universities, United States Bureau of Education, Circular of Information, no. 2, 1887 (Washington, D.C., 1887), pp. 9–10, 230–34; and Boozer, Howard Rai, “The American Historical Association and the Schools, 1884–1956” (Ph.D. diss., Washington University, St. Louis, 1960), pp. 33–85.Google Scholar

6. Krug, Edward A., The Shaping of the American High School (New York, 1964), p. 8.Google Scholar

7. I am indebted to Edward Krug for much of my understanding of the moderate revision of the 1890s. For a more complete analysis of this movement, see ibid., pp. 190–216.Google Scholar

8. See the NEA's Report of the Committee of Ten on Secondary School Studies (New York, 1894), pp. 28–31; Report of the Committee of Fifteen on Elementary Education (New York, 1895), pp. 63–67; and Report of the Committee of Twelve on Rural Schools (Chicago, 1897), pp. 101–4.Google Scholar

9. My thinking about the development of professions has been much informed and stimulated by the writings of sociologists. See especially Rue Bucher and Anselm Strauss, “Professions in Process,” The American Journal of Sociology 67 (January 1961): 325–34; and Bucher, Rue, “Pathology: A Study of Social Movements Within a Profession,“ Social Problems 10 (Summer 1962): 40–51.Google Scholar

10. “The Study of History in the Schools, Being the Report to the American Historical Association by the Committee of Seven,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1898 (Washington, D.C., 1899), 1; The Study of History in the Elementary Schools: Report to the American Historical Association by the Committee of Eight (New York, 1909); and The Study of History in Secondary Schools: Report to the American Historical Association by a Committee of Five (New York, 1911).Google Scholar

11. National Educational Association, Report of the Committee on College Entrance Requirements (Chicago, 1899), p. 8. For excerpts from this letter, see a letter from Herbert B. Adams to the Committee on Secondary Teaching of History, February 8, 1897, in the American Historical Association Records (Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Committees, Miscellany, Container 459). Nightingale made several specific suggestions to the Association concerning the course of study.Google Scholar

12. Adams, Herbert B., “Report of the Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the American Historical Association,“ Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1897 (Washington, D.C., 1898), 1: 4.Google Scholar

13. Letter from A. C. McLaughlin to members of the Committee of Seven, April 3, 1897, in American Historical Association Records. See ibid. (Containers 459–60), for other correspondence among members of the Committee of Seven and for minutes of three of the five meetings held by the committee.Google Scholar

14. The Study of History in the Secondary Schools, pp. 490–91.Google Scholar

15. Ibid., p. 430.Google Scholar

16. Ibid., pp. 490–91.Google Scholar

17. Ibid., pp. 438–39.Google Scholar

18. Ibid., pp. 446–47.Google Scholar

19. Ibid., pp. 447–48.Google Scholar

20. Ibid., pp. 451–56.Google Scholar

21. Ibid., p. 455.Google Scholar

22. Ibid., pp. 481–82.Google Scholar

23. Ibid., pp. 487–89. Even today, some historians hold the door to the profession open to secondary school teachers. See W. Stull Holt, The Historical Profession in the United States (New York, 1963), p. 28.Google Scholar

24. Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1897, 1: 10.Google Scholar

25. Report of the Committee on College Entrance Requirements, pp. 10, 37.Google Scholar

26. Ibid., p. 20.Google Scholar

27. Krug, , Shaping of the American High School, p. 249.Google Scholar

28. Dewey, John, “The School as Social Center’ NEA Proceedings (1902), pp. 373 ff. Google Scholar

29. Dewey, John, The School and Society (Chicago, 1899), p. 40.Google Scholar

30. Krug, , Shaping of the American High School, pp. 273–74.Google Scholar

31. Maxwell, William H., “Education for Efficiency,“ NEA Proceedings (1905), pp. 59–61, 65–66.Google Scholar

32. Krug, , Shaping of the American High School, p. 214.Google Scholar

33. Sullivan, James, “What Facts Should Be Taught in Secondary Schools that They May Better Understand the World They Live in?,“ NEA Proceedings (1905), pp. 460–46.Google Scholar

34. Snedden, David S., “History Study as an Instrument in the Social Education of Children,“ Journal of Pedagogy 19 (June 1907): 161–65. Also see Drost, Walter H., David Snedden and Education for Social Efficiency (Madison, 1967), pp. 83–84, 115, 128.Google Scholar

35. “Minutes of the Business Meeting of the American Historical Association,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1904 (Washington, D.C., 1905), 1: 52.Google Scholar

36. “Report of the Conference on the Teaching of History in Elementary Schools,” ibid., pp. 207–8.Google Scholar

37. Haskins, Charles H., “Report of the Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting,“ ibid., p. 29.Google Scholar

38. “Minutes of the Meeting of the Executive Council of the American Historical Association, Held in Chicago, December 18, 1904,” in American Historical Association Records (Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Executive Council, Minutes of Council Meetings, Containers 255–56).Google Scholar

39. Letter from A. C. McLaughlin to C. H. Haskins, January 19, 1905, in American Historical Association Records (Committees, Miscellany, Container 460).Google Scholar

40. Letter from A. C. McLaughlin to C. H. Haskins, January 27, 1905, in ibid.Google Scholar

41. Letter from J. A. James to C. H. Haskins, February 10, 1905, in ibid.Google Scholar

42. See “Report of the Conference on Teaching of History in Elementary Schools,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1905 (Washington, D.C., 1906), 1: 133–45; and “Report of Conference on Teaching of History in Schools,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1906 (Washington, D.C., 1907), 1: 61–104.Google Scholar

43. The Study of History in the Elementary Schools, p. x.Google Scholar

44. Ibid., pp. x–xii.Google Scholar

45. See the letter from James, J. A., to Haskins, C. H., November 20, 1905, in American Historical Association Records (Committees, Miscellany, Container 460).Google Scholar

46. Ibid. Bourne admitted he was responsible for most of the course of study. See Leland, Waldo G., “Report of the Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Meeting,“ Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1911 (Washington, D.C., 1912), 1: 33.Google Scholar

47. Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1905, p. 100.Google Scholar

48. The Study of History in the Elementary Schools, p. 118.Google Scholar

49. See “Minutes of the Meeting of the Executive Council of the American Historical Association Held in New York, November, 1907,” in American Historical Association Records (Containers 255–56).Google Scholar

50. The Study of History in Secondary Schools, pp. 13, 16–18, 40, 67.Google Scholar

51. Ibid., p. 64.Google Scholar

52. Ibid., p. 12.Google Scholar

53. See Correspondence in American Historical Association Records (Committees, Miscellany, Container 460; and Executive Council, Secretary's File, Container 243).Google Scholar

54. Letter from A. C. McLaughlin to C. H. Haskins, April 30, 1910, in American Historical Association Records (Container 243).Google Scholar

55. Letter from C. H. Haskins to A. C. McLaughlin, May 2, 1910, in ibid.Google Scholar

56. Letter from A. C. McLaughlin to C. H. Haskins, June 10, 1910, in ibid.Google Scholar

57. Letter from A. C. McLaughlin to C. H. Haskins, January 5, 1911, in ibid.Google Scholar

58. The Study of History in Secondary Schools, pp. 22–24.Google Scholar

59. See Crowe, Charles, “The Emergence of Progressive History,“ Journal of the History of Ideas 27 (January–March 1966): 109–24; and Cushing Strout, The Pragmatic Revolt in American History: Carl Becker and Charles Beard (New Haven, 1958), pp. 21–29.Google Scholar