RESPONSE FOR THE COLLEGES OF THE STATE

CHARLES H. RAMMELKAMP, PH.D.

President of Illinois College, Jacksonville

Corn and colleges are the pride of Illinois. The greatest corn-producing state of the Union has also been most prolific in producing colleges. Like Ohio and Pennsylvania, Illinois is the mother of a numerous progeny of small colleges. It is therefore, Mr. President, from a large family that I bring you this morning cordial greetings and best wishes, and I know that I speak not only for the institution which I represent directly, but for every college of the State, when I wish you God-speed in the great work which you are undertaking. The colleges of Illinois rejoice that a man of your intellectual attainments, executive ability, and broad sympathies has been called to the presidency of the State University, and they look to you with hope; nay, with more than hope, with confidence, that under your wise administration the University of Illinois will pursue a policy that will advance the general educational interests of the whole State. As a representative of Illinois College it gives me peculiar pleasure to bring you greetings this morning, for it was a member of our own early faculty, Jonathan B. Turner, who was a pioneer in the movement for the establishment of state universities and a member of the first faculty of the University of Illinois. Therefore, just as Illinois College. aided, as it were, in founding the State University, so today she rejoices in the prosperity which has come to the institution and in the bright promise of its future.

The relation of the colleges of Illinois to the State University involves, it must be confessed, a large and difficult problem. The conditions in our State are peculiar and different from those existing in many other states. In such states as Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Nebraska there exists but one large institution of higher learning, and that is the state university: nor is the number of smaller colleges in those states large. The result is that interest and effort center largely in the state institution. It is the only real university in the state. The problem is comparatively simple, for it involves only the relation of a single large institution to a few smaller ones. The practical solution of the problem there is that the state university dominates the whole educational system of the state, but in our own commonwealth the conditions are different and the problem is not so simple. Instead of one large institution we have at least three, and instead of ten small colleges we have over thirty. We may as well not close our eyes, then, to the fact that a perplexing situation confronts us; it will be best to face the issue squarely. We may not be able to settle the question in a day, or even in a year, but a frank discussion will greatly aid towards a proper adjustment of our rela

tions and a mutually helpful settlement of our difficulties. It was Matthew Arnold, I believe, who said, "It is better to discuss a question without settling it than to settle it without discussing it."

It is not to be denied that there exists in many of our states an antagonism between the colleges and the state universities. Says a well known and well informed educator of a nearby university, "The source of greatest trouble to many of our small colleges in the South, and especially in the western states, is the state university. Slowly the influence of this institution has gained ground until in some states it has become almost impossible for the colleges to continue their work with satisfaction. So strong has the antagonism come to be that in more than one state the smaller colleges have joined in an alliance the object of which is to meet the rapid encroachments of the state institutions. In the whole of the Mississippi valley there are not more than two or three non-state institutions which today do not stand in actual fear of the state institutions."

The small college has been assured by kind, frank friends that it is in danger of freezing to death in the shadow of the state university, and so it has not always felt kindly towards the body which casts the shadow. In the course of discussion, and more especially in the course of the keen, practical competition for patronage, hot words have been spoken, angry blows have been struck, some of them, I fear, even below the belt. Is it then really a struggle for existence, and is there no avenue of escape from the mean, jealous antagonism that seems to be manifesting itself in some quarters? Let us see what the real or supposed grounds of antagonism are.

The question of the college and the state university involves two sets of problems. First, those growing out of the relation of colleges and universities in general, and secondly, those arising from the special relation of the colleges and the state university. Thus the relation of the colleges of our State to the State University is part of the greater problem of the college and the university. Far be it from my purpose at this time to attempt an elaborate consideration of the larger problem. That the college is in a stage of transition needs no proof; nor need it be explained that in this process of transition the college has undergone and must still further undergo many fundamental changes. Pressed between the upper stone of the university and the nether stone of the high school, the college, once the crowning glory of our educational system, is losing its earlier form and character. The colleges with their decreasing endowments and their increasing deficits find it a heart-breaking race to keep up with the universities with their millions of endowment and magnificent equipment. The college numbers its students by hundreds, the university by thousands.

But besides these difficulties which characterize generally the relation between the college and the university, further special

problems arise out of the relationship of the state university and the college. If the feeling of fear or hostility on the part of the college towards the privately endowed universities has been great, still greater in many quarters has been the antagonism towards the state. university. The reasons for this attitude are several. In the first place, it has been charged that the state university fosters an irreligious spirit, and the friends of the small church college, ever anxious for the moral and religious salvation of the young people of our land, have looked with fear at the large state universities without compulsory chapel services, with inadequate courses in Bible study, and with no official sanction of religious effort. Not a few pastors and other well intentioned persons look at the state university as a place that fosters infidelity. Secondly, the absence of tuition charges at the state university makes it a keener competitor than the privately endowed institution. The small colleges usually appeal for patronage on the ground that they can furnish an education at cheaper cost than the larger universities, and in comparison with the private institutions this is undoubtedly true, for in most instances their tuition is twice and in many cases three times as high. But in comparison with the state university the appeal loses much of its force, for although living expenses and fees may be higher, tuition is free. The keener the competition the stronger the hostility is apt to be. In the third place, the state university is a very keen competitor because of what may be called its public position. It is virtually a part of the system of public education and is so very closely allied to the public high school that the stream of students is naturally turned towards the state university.

These, then, are some of the problems. Do they imply that it is a battle to the death, a fight to the finish, the finish of the small college? Must there be antagonism, and is combined effort for the great cause of education impossible? No one would seriously contend that the death-knell of the small college has been sounded. There seems indeed to be a reaction in favor of the college. The mission of the college in the educational system of the country may not be what it was a half century ago, but it still has a noble work to perform which no other agency can accomplish. The recent magnificent gifts to the cause of the college are but the evidence of a practical faith in a just, worthy, permanent cause. I hope and believe that we shall also discover that the grounds of antagonism between the college and the state university are more imaginary than real, and that combined effort is both possible and desirable.

Each institution has a wide field and a worthy mission, and if the friends of each will only appreciate better the exact nature of that mission, misunderstanding will cease and harmonious effort can prevail. Many of the difficulties arising from the keen competition for patronage will vanish if we only always recognize that there is an

object greater than the success of any particular institution or class of institutions. That object is the general educational progress of the state, and with this higher aim clearly before us, the petty misunderstanding must roll away.

The small colleges with habits and traditions of a long past, will have to adjust themselves to the new conditions, and those which refuse to recognize that conditions have changed will simply miss their opportunity. Let us reason together and be mutually helpful. Although it will doubtless remain a fact that the small college, if it is true to its highest ideals, will offer the better opportunity for moral and religious training, it is absurd to call the state university a nest of infidelity. As long as state universities have on their faculties, as they now have, men of high Christian character their influence must be good. The small, the good small college, does not fear the continued growth and prosperity of the state university. Most cheerfully does it surrender to the state university the whole field of technical, professional and graduate instruction. The state university may attract thousands of students, but there always will remain some, and their number is large, who prefer the smaller college nearer home. The close connection between the state university and the high school may decrease the patronage of the college, but how small is this danger in view of the good influence which the state university is exercising in raising the standard of work in the preparatory schools.

We are interested in the progress of the State University because it is a public institution. It has the sanction and support of the public opinion of our commonwealth and we unite with all good, patriotic citizens in wishing it a success that shall place it in the front rank of American state universities. Its glory is our glory. We rejoice in its success because the institution is part of a most wise and beneficent system of federal aid to education. We rejoice in its progress because that means the advancement of the general cause of education in Illinois. Rivalry between the colleges and the State University will continue, but let it be generous; let it not degenerate into antagonistic jealousy.

Once more we offer our sincerest congratulations to the new President. We view with pleasure the probable results of his administration because we know that his varied experience and generous sympathies have prepared him thoroughly to understand our problems. Furthermore, his public utterances and his policy as president of one of the largest denominational universities in the United States give the friends of the college the utmost confidence in him. Again the colleges of Illinois wish him God-speed.

RESPONSE FOR THE NORMAL SCHOOLS OF THE STATE

JOHN W. COOK, LL.D.

President of Northern Illinois State Normal School, De Kalb

It is my agreeable duty today to be the bearer of the cordial and sincere greeting of the state normal schools of Illinois to this young, vigorous, and expanding University.

While I have no official credentials from those whom I am to represent I am sure that I shall do no violence to their feelings in what I am about to say. So far as I am informed, and I believe myself well informed in this particular, there is but one sentiment among the members of the boards of control and of the faculties of our normal schools with regard to the University of Illinois. The policy of the University has been so liberal, so free from academic prejudice, so willing to concede to the normal schools all that their most partial friends could justly ask, that the spectacle, so often and so unhappily presented in some of our American states, of discordant and warring factions in public education has never been witnessed in Illinois.

It is an interesting fact that the existing arrangement by which the graduates of the state normal schools are received at the University was originated and put into operation by the University Faculty without any solicitation on the part of the normal schools. They were well understood within the official circles of the Universtiy. Some of the men to whom it is indebted for its honorable repute were from the benches of the normal school, while others had served in its faculty. When the University said to the normal schools, "If your matriculates are prepared to enter all of our courses without conditions we will give to your instruction full recognition," it dignified their faculties by elevating them to university rank, and thus threw upon them the responsibility of meeting their consequent obligations.

This attitude of the University has told most significantly upon. popular elementary education. In the course of ordinary events it will happen that some of its graduates will become teachers. They will gravitate by natural preference to the secondary or higher schools. But the normal graduates that seek these class rooms have selected education as their life work. Moreover, they have generally been attracted to elementary education by the impulse which they received from the normal schools. Its problems have awakened their warmest interest. They have discovered their difficulties and their tremendous significance. They have made the further interesting discovery that these problems furnish a field for the exercise of the best capacities of the most generously endowed minds, and that the American public is quick to recognize and reward the men and women who are able to solve them in a superior way. Impressed by these considerations large numbers of them are going to the University for that better