« PreviousContinue »
There can be no doubt as to President Harper's view in regard to the relation of the first two years of university work to the high school. He says:"
The work of the freshman and sophomore years is only a continuation of the academy or high-school work. It is a continuation not only in subject matter studied, but in methods employed. It is not until the end of the sophomore year that the university methods of instruction may be employed to advantage. * * * At present this constructive period of preparation, covering six years, is broken at the end of the fourth year, and the student finds himself adrift. He has not reached a point when work in any preparatory subjects is finished.
For him this view was more than theory, for he made every effort to put in operation some plan of organization that would recognize these essential facts. In 1902, at the annual meeting of the schools affiliated with the University of Chicago, the opportunity presented itself. As chairman of that meeting he recommended that a committee be appointed to study the entire educational system with a view to the adoption of the following plan:*
1. The connecting of the work of the eighth grades of the elementary school with
that of the secondary schools. 2. The extension of the work of the secondary schools to include the first two years
of college work. 3. The reduction of the work of these seven years thus grouped together to six years. 4. To make it possible for the best class of students to do the work in five years. One year later, at the seventeenth annual conference of the
“Academies and High Schools Affiliating or Cooperating with the
University of Chicago,” the committee presented a majority report
in favor of the extension of the high-school study to include two
additional years. Another committee, representing seven large universities, also reported favorably on the plan.” There can be little doubt that President Harper was thoroughly convinced of the wisdom of this move. Addressing the meeting of 1903, he said:* Ten years from now the high schools all over the country will have added a fifth and a sixth year and will be doing college work which now falls to the first two years of the college courses. In Minnesota and Michigan the State universities are accepting work done in many of the high schools for the first year of college study. I have no doubt that the high schools are going to do college work in the future.
Although more than 10 years have passed, it can hardly be said that the movement has gone as far as President Harper hoped. Nevertheless, his prophecy is being fulfilled at present in some sections of the country with amazing rapidity. A glance at the table presented in a later chapter will show the truth of this statement. That the high school may safely be intrusted with the first two years of college work seems to have been demonstrated by at least one institution
1 Harper, W. R. The Trend in Higher Education, p. 378. " Harper, W. R. Sch. Rev., vol. 12, p. 15. * Harper, W. R. Sch. Rev., vol. 11, p. 1. * Rep. Commis. of Educ., 1903, p. 573.
(Joliet High School, organized junior college department, 1902),
* Harper, W. R. The Trend in Higher Education, p. 349. *Ibid, p. 378.
14 THE JUNIOR COLLEGE.
the University of California reorganized the cultural courses of that institution with the following features:" --1. The retention of the traditional framework of the four-year college course leading to a bachelor's degree. 2. The recognition of the middle of this course as a suitable point for turning from cultural to professional aims, since the work of the first two years was in reality a continuation of the secondary educational and the work of the last two years could be connected without a break over into the strictly professional. Another committee reported in 1903 a further development of the plan of 1892. It provided– 1. For greater freedom in dovetailing the upper end of the fouryear course with the lower end of professional courses. 2. For a more definite, sharply marked separation of the last two years, upper division, from the first two years, lower division. 3. For a junior certificate to be given on the completion of six years of combined high school and college work to serve as an admission card to the upper division. This arrangement was made deliberately with a view to promoting a unified six
year course, to unstiffening the barrier between the twelfth and thirteenth grades, and to facilitating transfer from one group to another according to students change of
In 1907 another committee worked out a junior certificate for technical courses as well as cultural, further emphasizing the unity of the six years of secondary education. The same year the State
legislature passed an act enabling high-school districts to add two *...*.*.*. four-year course. In 1910 Fresno became the first high school to avail itself of this opportunity. By 1914 there were 10 and at the present time there are more than 20 of such extensions. We shall review later in greater detail some of the factors influencing this development, but it may be said here that in the minds of its promoters in California at least, the junior college is here to stay. There is ample evidence that there appeared in the minds of many educators at an early date the suggestion of the junior college as a means to the solution of the problems of the articulation of the high school with the college and university. In 1896 President Jesse, of the University of Missouri, in an address before the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, said:*
The first two years in college are really secondary in character. I always think of the high school and academy as covering the lower secondary period, and the freshf that An and sophomore years at college as covering the upper secondary period. In the
1 Lange, A. F. The Unification of Our School System. Sierra Educational News, vol. 5, June 9-14, p.99.
* 1bid, June, 1909.
* Jesse, R. R. Proc. N. Cen. Assoc. of Colleges.
condary period and in at least the first two years at college not only are the studies most identical, but the character of teaching is the same. At this same meeting President Draper, of the University of Point linois, said, in discussing President Jesse's address: ‘ f the We can not tell just where the high-school course is to end and the college course it. ommence. We all believe that they are continuous and ought to be uninterrupto '. hout he different circumstances of different communities will have much to do with xing the point where the high-school course shall stop and the college course begin. t of That point will be advanced higher and still higher as communities grow in size and crease in knowledge, in culture, in means, and in all the instrumentalities for ucational development and progress. " " Such are the beginnings of the junior college idea. In later chapters we shall consider the different types of the institutions as " they present themselves at present. In each case there will be a further more critical discussion of the potent influences operating to give rise to that peculiar type of institution. Following this there * I will be a detailed consideration of the present status of these institu! tions; their location, character, quality of instruction, and methods
of accrediting. #
INFLUENCES TENDING TO FURTHER THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE JUNIOR COLLEGE IDEA.
In the preceding chapter there was presented a brief discussion of the origin and early development of the junior college idea. It remains now to consider at some length those influences which have tended to further the development of this idea. For the purposes of this discussion, these influences have been grouped under the following general heads: 1. Those coming from within the university. 2. Those coming from within the normal school. 3. The demand for an extended high school. 4. The problem of the small college. *. It is of interest to note that these four lines of influences which have resulted in the development of the junior college may serve also to explain the four rather distinct types of junior college with which we are familiar to-day. These are: 1. the “lower division” of junior college within the university. 2. The normal school accredited for two years of college work. 3. The public junior college. 4. The private junior college. It is not the purpose here to discuss these various types. The chief concern in this chapter is to make clear by means of a somewhat detailed analysis those factors and influences which have contributed directly to the development of the junior college idea as a whole as well as to the peculiar types of junior college above mentioned.
1. INFLUENCES COMING FROM WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY.
The university must be held responsible for the first suggestion of the junior college idea in the United States. More particularly must this responsibility and perhaps honor go to the University of Michigan, where .######". officially recognized. From the university also comes the first practical demonstration in an administrative way of the possibilities of the new plan. Credit for this is probably to be divided equally between the Universities of Chicago and of California. But this is not all. In nearly every State where the junior college movement has made any significant progress, it has followed in the wa *iversity influence. Witness the situation in California, Illin souri, Minnesota, and Texas as evidence of this assertion.