CO-EDUCATION
90
CO-EDUCATION
complete development of woman's faculties, but also
as a necessary means to equip her for her new position.
The demand of course grew piore imperative as the
professions were opened to women. Once it was ad-
mitted that a woman might, for instance, take up the
practice of medicine, it was quite obvious as a matter
of public policy that she should receive the training
given to every phy.sician. How fully her claims have
been recognized will appear from statistics given above
of the growth of universities, colleges, and schools of
technology since 1889.
The rapid spread of co-education aroused intense interest not only among educators but also in the mind of the public at large. The subject was dis- cussed from every point of view, moral, medical, and economic, no less than educational. Special inquiries were sent out by school committees, State boards, and the United States Bureau of Education, with a view to obtaining statistics and expressions of opinion. Replies to these inquiries served as a basis for numer- ous reports, such as that of the Boston School Com- mittee (Document 19, 1890) and that of the Commis- sioner of Education based on the inquiry of 1S91. (See Commissioner's Report for 1900-1901, chap, xxviii.) The outcome of the discussion may be sum- marized as follows: (1) the tendency towards co-edu- cation as a universal policy was freely admitted by all parties; (2) considerable divergence of opinion was manifested as to the wisdom of co-education, particu- larly in secondary schools; (3) in many cases the issue was obscured by treating co-education as though it were synonymoas with the higher education of women.
In order to set this phase of the question in a some- what clearer light, it should be noted first of all that the reasons advanced in favour of the higher educa- tion of women, valid as they certainly are, do not of themselves require that this education shall be identi- cal with that given to men. Passing over for the present the question whether both sexes should study the same subjects by identical methods for the same length of time, or even supposing that this question should be answered in the affirmative, one is not thereby compelled to admit that co-education is the only acceptable policy. The efficient work of those colleges which are exclusively for women tells strong- ly in favour of separate education. On the other hand , it should be remarked that the unification of the schools into a system does not necessarily imply co- education all the way through. While endorsing the practice in the elementary school for certain reasons and in tjie university for other reasons, one may con- .sistently refuse to approve its introduction in the sec- ondary school. A third consideration turns on the moral factor. Tliis is, and always has been, of para- mount importance in Catholic education. Whatever advantages of an intellectual sort may be claimed for tlie co-educational school, these must, from the Catholic point of view, be waived if they carmot be obtained without danger to morality. This view of course is shared by many non-Catholic parents and teachers, some of whom have made it the basis of their criticism of co-education. Doubtless, too, it would have counted for more in the discussion if the whole problem of inoral education had received the attention bestowed in late years on everj'thing pertaining to purely intel- lectual culture. Where that problem is overlooked or lightly dismissed, some of the most serious objections to co-education naturally lose their force, while too much weight is attached to some of the reasons on the opposite side.
Phactice and Attitude of Catholic Schools. — As noted above co-education prevails in most of the Catholic elementary schools. That women should also share in the advantages of higher education is quite in keeping with Catholic policy. .\n instance of this is the authorization granted by Rome for women
to follow, under requisite conditions, courses at the
English universities (Decision of Propaganda, 13
July, 1907). Another is furnished by such institu-
tions as the Anna-Stift, a university school for Cath-
olic teaching sisters founded at the University of
Miinster in 1899 to meet the wishes of the German
bishops. Instruction is given by university profes-
sors not in the halls of the university but in the insti-
tute itself, an arrangement that is equivalent to what
has been mentioned above as co-ordinate education.
(See Engelkemper in Cath. Univ. Bulletin, May,
1908.) But in secondary schools, the Catholic policy
is decidedly opposed to co-education. The high
schools, academies, and colleges for boys are altogether
separate from those for girls. Boys are taught by
male teachers, girls by women, usually religious.
Nothing in fact so strongly emphasizes the Catholic
attitude in this matter as the work of various orders of
men established to teach boys, and of no less various
orders of women to teach girls. This is the century-
old practice of the Church, and it is observed in all
countries. Catholics, moreover, have followed with
interest the discussions concerning co-education ; and
though in many other respects they have adopted in
their own work the methods approved by experience
in non-Catholic schools, they have not been convinced
by the arguments advanced in favour of the co-educa-
tional plan.
From the viewpoint of economy co-education might seem the wiser plan ; but as a matter of fact, by increasing the number of pupils in each class it throws a heavier burden on the teacher and it makes difficult if not impossible that individual instruction, the need of which is now so generally recognized. A saving that impairs the efficiency of the school is hardly de- sirable. The advantage also that is claimed on the score of improved discipline, is more apparent than real. While the boys probably part with some of their roughness it is by no means certain that the deli- cacy of feeling and the refinement of manner that are expected in girls, gain much by the association. Moreover, if there is a demand for better discipline, the right way to meet it is to train teachers more thor- oughly in the art of school management. A skilful teacher will easily control a class either of boys or of girls by arousing and maintaining their interest in what is really the work of the school. On the other hand, it can do no harm to young people, especially boys, to cultivate betimes a spirit of obedience to law for its own sake, and not merely teach them to behave themselves out of deference for the opposite sex. There is no doubt a decided benefit to be gotten from social intercourse, provided this is accompanied by the proper conditions. The place for it is in the home, under the super^asion of parents, who will see to it that their children have the right kind of associates, and will not leave them to the chance companionships which the mixed school affords. It has often been held that the co-educational system extends to the school the "good effects that flow from the mutual in- fluence of mingling the sexes in the family circle"; but this contention evidently overlooks the profound difference between the home situation which asso- ciates children by natural ties of kindred, and the situ- ation in school where these ties do not e.xist. And it further forgets, apparently, that the home influence itself has latterly been weakened in many ways and by various causes; how far co-education has contributed to this result is of course another question. At any rate, it avails nothing to argue that because boys and girls live together in the same family, it is more nat- ural that they should be educated in the same classes. Wlien appeal is taken to the "natural" order of things, the decision is plainly in favour of separate schools.
On physiological grounds, identical education pre- sents serious difficulties. As no arrangement has
