The Social Function of Eighteenth-Century Higher Education

Phyllis Vine

History of Education Quarterly · 1976 · 25 citations · 2 references

Concepts

Abstract

SINCE the appearance of Bernard Bailyn's provocative essay, Education in the Forming of American Society, scholars have been acknowledging their debt to him with the most enduring form of flattery: they have heeded his call for a re-examination of the meaning of education in American society. In the years since his work appeared students have rewritten the history of different schools, of eminent educators, and of the host of goals and purposes for education. (1) Yet, in an important way some of the questions raised by Bailyn's work still have not been addressed. What new socializing roles did educational institutions perform as the family shed itself of old functions after 1700? This essay will attempt to deal with that question as it inquires into the social function of eighteenth-century college education. The rhetoric of educators, the hopes of parents, and the behavior of students indicate that a changed social function for education emerged after the 1740s. Educators perceived a moral crisis sweeping all of society and laid the blame to improper training within the family. They pinned their hopes for social stability on a pacific, orderly generation of youth. Parents recognized the increased difficulty in transmitting to their sons the advantages of class and wealth which could then be applied to leading a heterogeneous society. The concerns of each group intersected to project the college into a new role in which it would be endowed with greater responsibilities for training youth. Gradually the college was seen and came to serve as an institution which was best suited to inculcate virtue and promote social sponsorship among the privileged. Three colleges which were founded in the 1740s and 1750s provide the basic evidence for this discussion: The College of New Jersey, 1746; The College of Philadelphia,-1 754; and King's College, 1755. (2) Taken together they represent the most viable choices for higher education for the sons of the urban wealthy and landed gentry in the middle

References

2