In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

13 NEW INTERPRETATIONS AND NEW DIRECTIONS IN THE STUDY OF THE HISTORY OF HIGHER EDUCATION: THE 1970's INTO THE 1980's Comments Joan N. Burstyn Rutgers University We who belong to the Association for the Study of Higher Education are in an advantageous position to conduct historical research on issues relating to current educational practice. Some historians argue that history oriented to present needs distorts the past. I am not arguing, however, for all his­ torical research to be of this kind. I am saying that there is a place for such research, that the American Historical Association and the Organization or American Historians both acknowledge the role of "public historians," and that Historians of Education could play an important role, if they wish, in shaping the thought of policy makers in Higher Education. To particularize, I would like to see research into the history of the concept of evaluation in higher education. This includes the evolution of the process of self-evaluation as well as the process of peer evaluation of programs. Researchers would examine the professionalization of various dis­ ciplines and of college teaching as a whole. Has the concept of accountabi­ lity been a key factor in the development of evaluation? How far have State Departments of Education influenced the evolution of evaluation, and in what ways? I would like to see research into the effects of fiscal crises on col­ leges and universities in other periods. What alternative strategies were followed at those times? Are there instances where financial constraint pro­ duced educational innovation? If so, what were the circumstances under which innovation occurred? Were there particular groups in society who suffered or benefited from the constraints, and why did they do so? I think we could turn now to a study of the history of affirmative action in higher education. During the 1960's and 1970's many institutions commissioned studies of the status of women and minorities. In those studies a historical overview of changes affecting women and minorities at each in­ stitution was often included. In addition, each study formed the base for the collection of data. Affirmative Action officers now regularly collect data on the status of women and minorities so that source material is availa­ ble for scholars to use. I would like to see a new assessment of the role institutions of higher education have had in influencing the entry of women and minorities into professional and technical fields. How far have institu­ tional admissions policies, program designs, and scheduling affected the choices made by women and minorities? What role has faculty bias played in these matters? In what ways have the ambitions of Humanities faculty for a graduate (and undergraduate) constituency of their own dovetailed with soci­ etal expectations for women, and reinforced them? How far have universities fostered such expectations? Have there been institutional payoffs for the maintenance of the status quo for women and minorities? Have they been ex­ pected to enter higher education in specific fields? Have universities and colleges been as guilty of "steering" their clients as some real estate agents? These are questions that need now to be addressed. I think we need to look also, at the role of the Federal Government in Higher Education, in terms of the non intentional results of its intervention as well as the intentional results. For instance, only when we consider the issues relating to women and minorities do we begin to see that the G.I. Bill had some unintentional results that have not yet been examined. We know now that the huge drop in the percentage of degrees awarded to women after World 14 War II was caused not by a drop in the overall numbers of women obtaining degrees --those numbers increased slightly— but by a threefold increase in the numbers of men obtaining degrees as a result of the G.I. Bill. Black col­ leges may not have experienced such an influx of men, because the overall percentage of degrees awarded to women in Black colleges did not decrease after World War II. Why was this so? Did Black men not benefit from the G.I. Bill as much as other men...

pdf

Share