Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:39:13.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Trouble with Coeducation: Mann and Women at Antioch, 1853–1860

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2017

John Rury  and
Glenn Harper
John Rury
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Glenn Harper
Affiliation:
Ball State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Olympia Brown came to Ohio's Antioch College in 1856 in search of a liberal education. At Mount Holyoke Female Seminary she had found too many rules and restrictions: “young ladies are not allowed to stand in the doorway”; “young ladies are not allowed to linger in the halls”; and “we never examine young ladies in Algebra.” Reared in Michigan under the influence of a mother determined to see her daughters fully educated, Brown was attracted to Antioch “by evidence of a broader spirit.” She graduated four years later and went on to become the country's first ordained female Universalist minister, a women's rights activist, and a vice president of the National Women's Suffrage Association. In the 1850s, however, she was particularly interested in what Antioch's first president, Horace Mann, described as its “Great Experiment”: coeducation.

Type
Articles
Information
History of Education Quarterly , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , Winter 1986 , pp. 481 - 502
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 by the History of Education Society 

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

1. Willis, Gwendolyn, ed., Olympia Brown, Autobiography (Racine, Wis., 1960), 17–18.Google Scholar

2. Catalogue of Antioch College, 1853–1854 (Cincinnati, 1853).Google Scholar

3. The best biography of Mann is Jonathan Messerli, Horace Mann: A Biography (New York, 1972); also useful is Tyack, David B. and Hansot, Elisabeth, Managers of Virtue: Public School Leadership in America, 1820–1980 (New York, 1982), 56–63. Both of these accounts emphasize the importance of Mann's religious background for his later career, particularly his inability to accept the Calvinist tenet of original depravity.Google Scholar

4. Mann to Austin Craig, 13 May 1852, comp. Robert L. Straker, Mann Notes, p. 2578 (an unpublished copy of Horace Mann correspondence, available in Antiochiana Collection, Antioch College Archives). For an overview of the early history of Antioch, see Vallance, Harvard F., “A History of Antioch College” (Ph.D. diss., Ohio State University, 1936).Google Scholar

5. A useful summary of early coeducation programs can be found in Newcomer, Mabel, A Century of Higher Education for American Women (New York, 1959), 6. For statistics on enrollment see page 46.Google Scholar

6. Hogeland, Ronald W., “Coeducation of the Sexes at Oberlin College: A Study of Social Ideas in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America,” Journal of Social History 6 (Winter 1972-73): 168–69.Google Scholar

7. Ibid., 167–68.Google Scholar

8. A study of the Antioch catalogues from the 1850s provides details about enrollment (students were listed by name), the curriculum, and the faculty. See Antioch College Catalogue, 1853–55; Antioch College Catalogue, 1856–57 (Springfield, Ohio, 1856); Antioch College Catalogue, 1858–59 (Cincinnati, 1858). Also see Mann, Mary Tyler Peabody, Life of Horace Mann (Boston, 1865), 427. For a useful account of the curriculum at the female seminaries, see Green, Elizabeth Alden, Mary Lyon and Mount Holyoke: Opening the Gates (Hanover, N.H., 1979), especially chs. 4, 5, and 6.Google Scholar

9. Mann, Horace, “The Powers and Duties of Women: A Lecture,” Feb. 1852, in Straker, Mann Notes, 2530.Google Scholar

10. Antioch College Catalogue, 1853–55, 3–6. Also Vallance, , “History of Antioch College,” 92.Google Scholar

11. For discussion of this quality in Mann, see Tyack, and Hansot, , Managers of Virtue, 58. For an account of popular and scientific attitudes about women's abilities, see Rosenberg, Charles and Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll, “The Female Animal: Medical and Biological Views of Woman and Her Role in Nineteenth-Century America,” Journal of American History 60 (Sept. 1973): 332-56.Google Scholar

12. “Report on the Admission of Females,” Proceedings of the Board of Regents, University of Michigan 1837–64 (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1915), 789.Google Scholar

13. Welter, Barbara, “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820–1860,” American Quarterly 18 (Summer 1966): 151–74.Google Scholar

14. Taken from “Report of the Admission of Females,” 791.Google Scholar

15. See, for instance, the account in Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 420–21.Google Scholar

16. Orton, James, The Liberal Education of Women: The Demand and the Method (New York, 1873), 270.Google Scholar

17. For an account of the faculty's views, see Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 386.Google Scholar

18. Antioch College Catalogue, 1853–55, 52–54. In the college's early years, apparently some women students were allowed to board with families who had no sons and had been personally screened by Mann. This may have been due to a shortage of space at the college. Mann's letter to the Michigan regents several years later suggests he was then opposed to women living off campus. See Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 421. Mann's wife notes that he was ever careful to “throw guards around the young ladies,” wherever they lived.Google Scholar

19. Ibid.; also see Antioch College Catalogue, 1855–57, 38–40.Google Scholar

20. See Rudolph, Frederick, The American College and University: A History (New York, 1961), ch. 8.Google Scholar

21. Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 526.Google Scholar

22. Mann, , “The Powers and Duties of Women,” Straker, Mann Notes, 2532.Google Scholar

23. Quoted in Jex-Blake, Sophia, A Visit to Some American Schools and Colleges (New York, 1867), 134–35.Google Scholar

24. On this issue see Degler, Carl N., At Odds: Women and the Family in America from the Revolution to the Present (New York, 1980), chs. 11 and 12. On the experiences of women on other campuses, see Haines, Patricia Foster, “For Honor and Alma Mater: Perspectives on Coeducation at Cornell University, 1868–1885,” Journal of Education 159 (Aug. 1979): 25–37; Gordon, Lynn, “Coeducation on Two Campuses: Berkeley and Chicago, 1890–1912,” in Women's Beings Women's Place: Female Identity and Vocation in American History, ed. Kelley, Mary (Boston, 1979), 171-93; and Hague, Amy, “‘What If the Power Does Lie within Me’: Women Students at the University of Wisconsin, 1875–1900,” History of Higher Education Annual 3 (1984): 78–100. On all-female campuses see Frankfort, Roberta, Collegiate Women: Domesticity and Career in Turn-of-the-Century America (New York, 1977).Google Scholar

25. The faculty member was Rebecca Pennell, Mann's niece, who threatened to resign in late 1853 because she was receiving only half the pay of the male faculty. In asking to be released as an officer of the college and appointed to the Preparatory Department, she noted, “my name would not then be paraded before the world, as a show of anything false or unreal.” Letter from Pennell to the Antioch College trustees, 13 Jan. 1854, Straker, Mann Notes, 3124-26. Pennell remained on the college faculty until 1858.Google Scholar

26. Hardy, Irene, An Ohio Schoolmistress: The Memoirs of Irene Hardy, ed. Filler, Louis (Kent, Ohio, 1980), 204.Google Scholar

27. Willis, , ed., Olympia Brown, Autobiography, 19. For comparison of the ages of early Antioch students with those from other schools, see the statistics in Burke, Colin, American Collegiate Populations: A Test of the Traditional View (New York, 1982), ch. 3.Google Scholar

28. Antioch College Catalogue, 1859–61 (Springfield, Ohio, 1859), 7–10.Google Scholar

29. Quoted in Willis, , ed., Olympia Brown, Autobiography, 20. Also see Brackett, Anna C., ed., The Education of American Girls. Considered in a Series of Essays (New York, 1874), 244.Google Scholar

30. Allmendinger, David F., Paupers and Scholars: The Transformation of Student Life in Nineteenth-Century New England (New York, 1975), see chs. 4–6.Google Scholar

31. See, for instance, the account of Mahala Jay, who came to Antioch from Oberlin in 1853, in her obituary in “Antioch Alumni Number,” College Bulletin 13 (1 Dec. 1916): 10.Google Scholar

32. Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 526.Google Scholar

33. Quoted in Straker, Robert, “The Apprenticeship of G. Stanley Hall, 1872-76,” Antioch Alumni Bulletin 5 (May 1934): 6.Google Scholar

34. See Willis, , ed., Olympia Brown, Autobiography, 20; Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 419-20; and Blake, , A Visit to Some American Schools, 130.Google Scholar

35. A good overview of early student societies at Antioch is provided by Stein, Geoffrey N., “Antioch's Literary Societies in the 1850's” (Undergraduate thesis, Antioch College, 1965).Google Scholar

36. Ibid., 44.Google Scholar

37. Ibid., 45–46. Also see the Society's minutes, called “The Alethezetean Record,” 8 Sept. and 22 Dec. 1854.Google Scholar

38. “Alethezetean Record,” 2, 9, and 10 Mar. 1885.Google Scholar

39. Rice, Rebecca, “Antioch in the Fifties,” Antiochian 27 (Dec. 1907): 61.Google Scholar

40. Quoted in Abbott, Louise, “History of the Star Society,” Antiochian 2d ser., 4 (May-June 1915): 20.Google Scholar

41. Mary Mann to Mrs. M.D. Conway, 2 Mar. 1864, Straker, Mann Notes, 4654.Google Scholar

42. Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 526–27.Google Scholar

43. In a letter that Mary Mann wrote to her sister, Sophia Hawthorne, she explained that Ada Shepard—a recent Antioch graduate and tutor for the Hawthorne children—had not gotten her women's rights ideas at the college. “Her coming has saved her from being a furious womens rights woman. All the influence exerted here is adverse to the thing. But as this is where women can be fully educated it brings among others that very class of women greatly to Mr. Mann's annoyance. He makes them inexpressibly uncomfortable here but he tries to modify them.” Mary Mann to Sophia Hawthorne, 18 May 1858, Straker, Mann Notes, 2026.Google Scholar

44. Stein, , “Antioch's Literary Societies,” 51.Google Scholar

45. Ibid., 52. Also see Leavel, Nancy M. to the Antioch College faculty, 19 June 1857, Straker, Mann Notes, 3866.Google Scholar

46. Quoted in the Christian Palladium, 1 Aug. 1857, 188.Google Scholar

47. Stein, , “Antioch's Literary Societies,” 52; Nancy M. Leavell to Antioch College faculty, 19 June 1857, Straker, Mann Notes, 3866.Google Scholar

48. See Rice, , “Antioch in the Fifties,” 63.Google Scholar

49. See the Cincinnati Gazette, 30 June 1857. Events at the college were often featured in local newspapers. See Stein, , “Antioch's Literary Societies,” 73.Google Scholar

50. Nancy Nooks to Mann, 1 July 1857, Antioch College Archives.Google Scholar

51. This letter is filed in the Antiochiana Collection, Antioch College Archives.Google Scholar

52. Mann, , Life of Horace Mann, 527.Google Scholar

53. Brown, Olympia, Acquaintances, Old and New among Reformers (Milwaukee, Wis., 1911), 16.Google Scholar

54. Ibid., 21.Google Scholar

55. Address by Mrs. S.W. Dodds of St. Louis, Mo., to Crescent Society of Antioch College, Antiochiana Collection, Antioch College Archives.Google Scholar

56. Stein, , “Antioch's Literary Societies,” 56.Google Scholar

57. See Antiochian, 2d ser., 9 (1884): 29–34.Google Scholar

58. For information on the marriage rates and careers of collegiate women, see Solomon, Barbara Miller, In the Company of Educated Women: A History of Women and Higher Education in America (New Haven, Conn., 1985), ch. 8; also see Sklar, Kathryn Kish, “The Founding of Mount Holyoke College,” in Women of America: A History, ed. Berkin, Carol Ruth and Norton, Mary Beth (Boston, 1979), 177–201. Marriage rates for women from all institutions, coed or all-female, were between 70 to 80 percent in this period, and the overwhelming preponderance of graduates went into education. Women like Olympia Brown, or Oberlin graduate Antoinette Brown, who became ministers were extremely rare.Google Scholar

59. Brown, , Acquaintances, Old and New among Reformers, 17.Google Scholar