Putting New Wine in Old Wineskins: The Origins of the Founding Curriculum of the University of Illinois

Abstract

THE BIBLICAL CAUTION ABOUT PUTTING NEW WINE in old wineskins aptly illustrates the curricular challenges facing the Illinois Industrial University at its founding.1 New wine—an emerging new emphasis on practical education, agriculture, engineering, and military studies—would likely burst the older wineskin of classical higher education embodied in the liberal arts. Existing curricular structures could not sustain the expanding additions of the practical disciplines.The Morrill Act of 1862 ushered in a new era in American higher education. Through the sale of federal land, states were to use revenues to maintain at least one college “where the leading object shall be, without excluding other scientific and classical studies, and including military tactics, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, . . . in order to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life.”2 The land-grant universities created a new paradigm of higher education while preserving traditional elements of the college curriculum. The task was to put the new wine of agriculture, engineering, and military studies into old, venerated wine skins of the classical curriculum without bursting them—a challenge of biblical proportions.3Founded as the Illinois Industrial University, the later named University of Illinois was unique as a land-grant institution. It was to be the flagship public university of Lincoln's home state. Jonathan Baldwin Turner, who has been suggested as the father of the land-grant idea, was an Illinois resident.4 Illinois saw the need to create a new university in keeping with the uniqueness of the land-grant model. While every state accepted the federal offer, the citizens of Illinois were leaders in advocating the land-grant ideal.Illinois took advantage of the Morrill Act by founding the Illinois Industrial University in February 1867. Scheduled to open in March 1868, its founders had thirteen months to establish a course of study that was unique to American higher education.5 Conflicting and vocal interest groups argued their divergent interpretations regarding legislative intent. There was limited precedent in antebellum higher education for the mandated courses. Further complicating the problem was the limited experience of the first university regent, John Milton Gregory, in agricultural, practical, military, and industrial education.6Published three months before opening, an editorial in the Prairie Farmer read: “The most difficult task before the Board was the adoption of courses of study, for, after all, the great question is, what shall be taught in these latter-day institutions? In what respect shall the education here differ from that given to the student in the already established colleges and universities? How shall the children of the industrial classes be educated to best fit them for the duties of a practical, laboring life?”7This article explores the origins of the founding curriculum of the University of Illinois at its opening in 1868 by examining the curricular antecedents utilized to create the new course of study. Later modifications followed, but with the practical urgency to open the doors in a mere thirteen months, something had to be done quickly.The history of American higher education before the Civil War is the story of the liberal arts college. From the 1600s, American colleges followed the English models—from Oxford, to Cambridge, to Puritan Harvard, to the denominational hilltop colleges. Ancient languages were the foci, particularly with a view to religious training.8 By the early nineteenth century, the utility of classical studies in an era of nation-building was questioned. The need to encourage commerce, create transportation infrastructure, increase agricultural productivity, protect the nation militarily, and move forward in scientific explorations of the new nation challenged higher education. There was a continent to conquer and a nation to build, and the traditional curriculum of the American college was not up to that task.At the same time, German higher education was going through a profound transformation.9 The establishment of the University of Berlin (1810) transformed education from teaching to research; from accommodating the church to servicing the nation; and from lecturing passive learners to creating inquisitive students. Mobilized by new emphases of Bildung, Wissenschaft, and Weltanschauung, German higher education was committed to research and science and encouraged scientific inquiry and the application of new knowledge.Nineteenth-century American educational reformers also advocated curricular change. The United States Military Academy at West Point, under the reforms of Sylvanus Thayer, radically altered the collegiate curriculum. Early reform attempts to bring scientific studies into higher education included Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1824), Yale's Sheffield Scientific School (1847) and Harvard's Lawrence Scientific School (1846). Several early reforms produced polytechnic schools, farmers’ institutes, manual labor colleges, and commercial colleges. Most did not succeed or were assimilated into existing colleges.10Alternative colleges and institutes existed in Illinois prior to the founding of the Illinois Industrial University: Franklin Manual Labor College, the Burnt Prairie Manual Labor Seminary, and the Chatham Manual Labor School are examples. In recognition of the emerging demand for scientific and practical studies, Congregationalists chartered Knox Manual Labor College while the Baptists established Shurtleff College. Both of these sectarian colleges required manual labor and argued that they should be the recipient of the Morrill Act status within Illinois.11Traditionalists held that scientific and practical studies had their place, but not in the traditional college curriculum. In 1828, a committee of Yale's faculty issued a rejoinder to the challenges facing the classical curriculum. The Yale Report presented an apologetic for the liberal art tradition.12 The document reverberated throughout the antebellum academy and became the battle cry of the traditionalists who opposed change.13The University of Illinois was birthed in conflict. Competing visions of the Morrill Act animate early institutional history from its founding in February 1867 to its opening in March 1868. State political leaders, existing educational institutions, and agricultural and industrial newspapers, societies, and movement leaders were quick to express opinions concerning Morrill Act intentions. Illinois faced the challenge of accommodating divergent interpretations of legislative intent, often expressed in the Illinois press.14 Views ranged from limited modifications of the traditional curriculum to calls for a radically new institution.It was determined that Illinois should establish a new university rather than modify an existing institution. By March 1867, the newly appointed Board of Trustees began the task of identifying the regent to lead the new college. John Milton Gregory was appointed due to his background in education, familiarity with earlier reforms in Michigan, and his respect for Protestant sensibilities.15Significant conflict surrounded the choice of Gregory. With a largely Baptist Board of Trustees, Gregory's choice hinted at sectarianism, and state agricultural leaders vehemently disagreed with the selection.16 Gregory had experience as president at Kalamazoo College, served as Michigan superintendent of education, and possessed religious credentials that appealed to the pastor-president model of higher education. What Gregory lacked was background in agriculture, mechanical arts, or military science—all of which were foundational to Morrill Act intent. Gregory was the perfect choice to run a traditional college. Proponents of the Morrill Act felt the board had eviscerated the legislative intent by hiring a churchman with no experience in the new curricular areas.On May 8, 1867, the Board of Trustees created the Committee on Faculty and Course of Study. The following morning, in addition to Gregory, Mason Brayman, Samuel Snowden Hayes, Willard C. Flagg, and Newton Bateman were tasked to the committee. Each of these men brought their own influences to bear on the early Illinois curriculum. Brayman was also a Baptist who had a distinguished military career during the Civil War. He was not from the professional cadre at West Point, making him an ideal selection against alleged academy hegemony being challenged in the post–Civil War era. Populist views on military education had shaped its inclusion in the Morrill Act.17Samuel Snowden Hayes was a self-taught lawyer and politician. The 1870 census listed Hayes as a “capitalist” with $650,000 in real estate and $30,000 in personal property—both staggering sums for the time.Newton Bateman was state superintendent of schools for Illinois, and like Gregory, was classically and theologically trained. Gregory found a kindred spirit in Bateman who had ministerial experience, state superintendency, and appreciated the classical tradition.The only member of the committee with extensive agricultural background was Willard Flagg. A graduate of Yale (1854), Flagg best understood the challenges of the Morrill Act mandate. He proposed general categories of knowledge in an early essay on “The Illinois Industrial University” utilizing three classifications schemes as possible frameworks for the new University curriculum.18 Flagg's personal papers include pamphlets supporting his study of models of industrial and agricultural education.19The committee's unifying factor would be Gregory himself. Gregory was the prime architect for the opening curriculum, drawing from his own experience and education. Writing the report with concurrence from his fellow committee members, Gregory's hybrid vision shaped the launch of the new university.20The Morrill Act stipulated the study of four major components—scientific studies, classical studies, military studies, and practical studies (agricultural and mechanical arts). For Illinois to open in thirteen months, it was essential that the committee fashion the curriculum from available models.21Gregory interpreted the phrase “the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes” as a balance rather than the subjugation of the liberal arts to practical subjects.22 He viewed the liberal arts tradition as a curricular foundation to be augmented with practical studies. Illinois agriculturalists and industrialists contended that the legislative intent was to minimize the liberal arts to a secondary role.23The military studies component was more problematic. While various military institutions existed, the United States Military Academy at West Point was the preeminent model.24 Using West Point created a two-edged sword for Gregory. West Point developed and defined military education. Gregory, in his inaugural address, referred to Illinois as the “West Point for the Working World.”25 Illinois could not ignore West Point, but in the post–Civil War era, it was perceived as elitist and counter to the citizen-soldier populist model favored in the more democratic and inclusive land-grant universities. In the aftermath of the Civil War, calls for West Point's closure were made by those who supported a more populist form of military education. To model Illinois after West Point was to risk charges of elitism. Further, there was concern that West Point would not permit challenges to its perceived hegemony on military education. Concerned, Gregory wrote that “West Point men will oppose it as likely to injure the institution.”26Scientific and practical studies also posed a challenge. A limited number of antebellum institutions had begun scientific courses, but it was still considered academically novel. Finding qualified faculty was also challenging.27 Gregory was limited by a lack of experience in the mechanical arts and agricultural sciences—a point not lost on his detractors.28 Agricultural faculty were practically nonexistent, and models of agricultural education were limited to a few farmers’ institutes—and these were seldom at a collegiate level.29 Advances at German universities were foreign to Gregory who had little exposure to educational changes abroad.30Reluctant to surrender the classical tradition that defined higher education, and hesitant to subjugate it to the practical and industrial arts, Gregory hybridized the curriculum by weaving elements from three existing curricular strands—the traditional liberal arts, West Point for military studies and engineering, and emerging scientific studies, notably exemplified by the scientific course offered at his alma mater, Union College. This model provided a scientific foundation for agricultural education.Gregory interpreted the Morrill legislation to mean that the liberal arts could be a significant component of the new curriculum.31 In his first lecture at the Illinois Industrial University, Gregory invoked language reminiscent of the Yale Report by placing an Illinois education squarely into the purview of the liberal arts. Identifying the aims of study, he reasoned that a true college education had as its goal: 1st The development of the mind by exercising its powers and nourishing its growth;322nd The acquisition of knowledge;333rd The acquisition of skill or special knowledge & strength.34By connecting language of the liberal arts tradition with Illinois, Gregory established academic legitimacy. In his inaugural address, Gregory was cautious to maintain a continuity with the past and avoid burning bridges with the liberal arts tradition.35The early Illinois curriculum closely resembled the curricula that Gregory experienced as a student at Union College under Eliphalet Nott.36 Union pioneered a dual course track that allowed student choice between a classical or a scientific course while maintaining elements common to both. First-year students completed a common course core before selecting between the two options their sophomore year. Union College's scientific curriculum offered a broad option of science courses that allowed for a diverse application—exactly what Gregory needed at Illinois. Foundational science courses offered greater adaptability and were justifiable for the applied areas of agriculture and mechanical arts. In a published address in 1869, Gregory argued: Agriculture is both an art and a science. So far as it simply applies to practice in special rules, directing to particular results, it is an art. I imagine that most men class it as an art.But authority or usage permits us to class as sciences, some branches of knowledge which are combinations of the facts of several sciences. . . Agriculture, the great mother of arts—the all-sustaining fundamental art—the art of all arts—may claim to be a science. It combines many sciences on one common field—the field of animal and plant life.37Gregory borrowed Union College's scientific course for the basis of the scope and sequence in Illinois's founding curriculum. The sequence was modified with a greater focus given to history. The inclusion of traditional courses from Union College, coupled with general science courses provided credibility and demonstrated legitimacy consistent with other colleges—something Gregory was determined to do. The Union College curriculum provided the platform to build Illinois.The second aspect of the Morrill curricular structure was practical studies. Gregory looked to both Union College and West Point as potential models. Mathematics was critical to the emerging scientific curriculum. As a foundation for the sciences, the plan at Illinois approximated West Point, with students completing calculus by the second year, which was more rigorous than Union College. Analysis of 1868 student term records reveal that many took algebra during their entering year, indicating the need for remedial work.38 First-year examination scores indicate that entering students lacked the requisite training in both algebra and geometry.Regarding agriculture, Illinois faced two challenges. First, scientific agriculture—and professors to teach it—was absent in American higher education. Second, differences of opinion existed regarding general science courses as a foundation for agricultural education versus practical training on the university farm. Early critics were far more concerned with practice than theory. Gregory understood that solid scientific application of appropriate disciplines would benefit the future farmers and mechanics. General science was at the heart of the curriculum, rather than formal courses in agronomy, horticulture, or animal husbandry. Opponents argued that the lack of formal instruction in agriculture would render Illinois superfluous to the practical experience gained on the family farm. Early criticism targeted the notable lack of agricultural courses.39 Illinois farmers did not want a classical education supplemented with manual labor on a hobby farm. Agriculture was not to be relegated to cocurricular or extracurricular status. Gregory's idea of foundational science courses, in the absence of agricultural course work, was unacceptable and an abandonment of the Morrill intent. In a rebuttal to criticism from M. L. Dunlap, it was argued that “its primary object was the sustainment of science, not merely or chiefly the practice. The adaption of science to the practice must come after the school labors are over and the student has gone out into practical life.”40 Gregory determined that the application of agricultural and mechanical arts flourished as an outcome of a strong scientific foundation. While practical farming and manual labor had their place at Illinois, they were not the core of university education.Many early Illinois students used these courses to migrate toward careers in medicinal or pharmaceutical professions rather than scientific agriculture.41 Early critics argued that Illinois had used the Morrill Act as a pretext for another liberal arts college that was only paying lip-service to legislative intent by offering farming experience coupled with disconnected, secondary general science courses. Their criticism was not without warrant as Gregory's view of what constituted a higher education was in direct conflict with the vision championed by the state agriculturalists.In an attempt to sway public opinion, Gregory provided a flow chart in early university literature demonstrating how general scientific studies would translate into farming applications. Using a dendritic scheme, he organized course work into three broad categories: “The Farm” taught agricultural business (commercial) and soils (geology and chemistry); “Plant Culture” included botany and entomology; and “Animal Husbandry” utilized course work in zoology. Additionally, public agricultural lectures were devised as an early form of extension service.42Finally, and consistent with other Illinois colleges, manual labor was an early component of the student's experience.43 Argued in the Report of the Committee of Courses of Study and announced as the “labor system” in early circulars, it was reasoned that “this union and alteration of mental and muscular effort will not only give ‘the sound mind in the sound body,’ but will produce educated men who will be strong, practical and self-reliant, full of resource, and practical in judgment, the physical equals of the strongest, and the mental peers of the wisest; redeeming higher education from the odium of puny forms and pallid faces, and restoring the long lost and much needed sympathy between educated men and the great industrial and business classes.”44 Manual labor was how Illinois would produce “men, not monks.”45 Lorado Taft's iconic statue Alma Mater later epitomized the university motto of “Learning” and “Labor.” Gregory thought that physical labor would resonate well with the state agriculturists.The final aspects of the Morrill mandate were the mechanical arts (engineering) and military studies.46 West Point provided the curricular model and Gregory proclaimed that Illinois was the “West Point for the Working World.” In the tradition of West Point, Illinois created its own version of the “Long Gray Line.” Students would dress in cadet uniforms modeled after West Point. The 1868 circular observed, “This uniform consists of a suit of cadet gray mixed cloth, of the same color and quality as that worn at West Point and manufactured by the same establishment.”47General Mason Brayman was assigned the task of coordinating military inclusion in the curriculum. Working with Major John Hotchkiss Whittlesey, early curricular recommendations provided some direction for military studies at all new land-grant colleges. Differing from other Morrill subjects, these templates offered recommendations regarding instruction and military expectations.48Samuel Walker Shattuck was hired to teach both military science and mathematics. A graduate of the Vermont Military College, Shattuck had served in the Civil War. He also embodied the citizen-soldier outside the professional West Point cadre. Captain Edward Snyder assisted Shattuck by teaching German—a relevant second language owing to German immigrants in Illinois—as well as bookkeeping—an important farm skill. French was also required as it fulfilled a liberal arts language expectation and the need to read French military literature in the post-Napoleonic military tradition.49Illinois differed from West Point by offering no course work in tactics, fortifications, artillery, ordnance, or cavalry, but students drilled and paraded regularly, which provided pageantry to local spectators. Student James Newton Matthews wrote to his father that they alternately drilled or attended lecture from 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. daily.50West Point was well known for engineering, and its graduates were highly sought in industry. In the era of nation-building, demand for civil engineers outpaced the ability of West Point to produce them. Formal engineering courses were lacking from the opening Illinois curriculum, but civil engineering (surveying) was offered, consistent with both West Point and Union College and its perceived farm value. The Report of the Committee on Course of Study and Faculty recognized the need for courses in engineering and mining, but engineering faculty were not secured for the university's opening. In the 1868 circular, engineering departments such as Mechanical Arts and Sciences, Military Tactics and Engineering, Mining and Metallurgy, and Civil Engineering were described, although no formal elaboration on the departments, or evidence of professorships, was offered.51 Industrialists were less vocal about engineering courses than farmers about agricultural courses. In the years that followed, the department of engineering expanded significantly and eclipsed agriculture as Illinois's raison d’être.52Gregory's implementation of the early Illinois curriculum drew the ire of state agriculturalists. Few critics were as hostile to Gregory as trustee Matthias Lane Dunlap.53 A university trustee and advocate of agricultural education, he embraced the concept of educating the “sons of toil,” by addressing such issues in state newspapers under the pen name “Rural.” Early in the formation of the curriculum, Dunlap believed that Gregory had neither the professional capacity and competency to lead in agricultural and industrial education nor the inclination to minimize the liberal arts. Dunlap became Gregory's nemesis, and his use of the press, later referred to by historians as the Dunlap affair, alerted the citizens of Illinois to Gregory's apparent subversion of the land-grant ideal.In one of his more satirical outbursts, Dunlap wrote, On the assembling of these seventy-seven students, nothing was more natural than that the faculty should recommend them to study Latin, for this is the first step in the ladder of fame as constructed by the old monks of the middle ages, and the clerical gentlemen of the present day would loose a large share of their ingenious metaphysics if deprived of the classical immoralities and barbarisms of the heathen mythology. What relation the study of Latin may have to agriculture is beyond my comprehension, and yet it was given front rank, and such simple studies as chemistry, botany, veterinary and the natural sciences were entirely ignored.54Shortly after the opening of the university, and to demonstrate curriculum priority by monitoring the courses students were taking, he observed: “The correspondent proceeds to show that taking the time devoted to each, there are three classes which relate to agriculture; six to languages; one to English composition; and two to book-keeping. Of these, Greek occupies, proportionately, one hour, Latin three hours, English composition one hour, Agriculture one hour, and Chemistry (3) and Botany (1) together four hours—(These being related to Agriculture)—Algebra two hours Book-keeping two, French one and German two hours.”55Dunlap's criticisms provided useful insight, causing Gregory to make clarifications regarding curricular intent, Morrill mandate compliance, and integration with accepted higher education practice. In the end, the Board of Trustees backed Gregory's program, forcing Dunlap to tone down his rhetoric.Critics argued that Illinois abrogated its Morrill mandate. One noted, “It is a school of learning by itself; it is true; but the agricultural department is only an attachment to a classical college, instead of a classical department being an attachment to an agricultural college, as its founders intended, if indeed they desired to have the classics studies at all.”56 Jonathan Baldwin Turner, considered by many as the father of the land-grant movement, reflected on Gregory and his work.57 With less vitriol than Dunlap, he observed to Illinois trustee and curricular committee member Willard C. Flagg that some of my letters accuse him of dishonesty; talking only our ideas to blind the people, and the better to achieve his scholastic and pedantic ends. I do not think so. I think the man entirely honest, and really in love with our theories, as a beautiful and truthful, and indeed an irresistible scheme of philosophical education; but like most men bred wholly in the Schools, he sees it only in its outlines as a beautiful theory, while he knows so little of the immense details it covers, that when he attempts to organize and set it in motion he utterly, but honestly fails.58Gregory and the Committee on Faculty and Course of Study faced a difficult task: create an entirely new curriculum while maintaining elements of the older, venerated tradition. Lacking clear curricular road maps, facing an opening deadline, and trying to appease an opinionated constituency, the opening curriculum at Illinois was a blending of the scientific course from Union College and military and engineering elements from West Point. Manual labor, agricultural lectures, farm work, and chapels offered additional elements to the curricular model.59 The committee's final document was an apologetic of Gregory's vision and interpretation of Morrill legislative intent.60 Never abandoning the tradition with which he was most comfortable, he melded together elements from trusted institutions. While critics decried their efforts, the University of Illinois adapted to become one of the United States’ most respected public research universities. For the founding leaders at Illinois, their challenge had been to put new curricular wine in the venerated old institutional wineskins of higher education.