The earliest mention of a post-graduate degree in the records of the University of Michigan is dated 1845, only eight years after the establishment of the University in Ann Arbor. In resolutions adopted by the Board of Regents in April of that year appears the statement: “No candidate for the second degree of Master of Arts shall receive this honor, unless he has preserved a good moral character, and previously to the Commencement, has signified his desire of the same to the Faculty.”
It is implied that the degree was at first designed to be an honorary one, although not in the sense that this term is applied today. The candidates were selected from those who expressed a desire to be considered. The honor was originally intended for the University’s own alumni, but in 1847 it was resolved:
That alumni of other Colleges and Universities who wish, be regarded as Alumni of this, and that the Faculty be authorized to recommend them for the degree of A.M. in the same manner as Alumni of this Institution; and, also, that they recommend such persons from time to time as they think worthy, for the honorary degree of A.M.
(R.P., 1837-64, p. 368.)
Included in the same resolution was a provision for the appointment of a committee of three to confer with the faculty in reference to the qualifications required for conferring the regular degree of master of arts.
At first provision was made so that the degree could be conferred upon any alumnus or graduate of three years’ standing. In 1852 the requirements were made more rigid. The Catalogue for that year stated:
The degree of Master of Arts will not be conferred in course upon graduates of three years standing, but only upon such graduates as have pursued professional or general scientific studies during that period. The candidate for the degree must pass an examination before one of the Faculties. He must also read a Thesis before the Faculties of the University at the time of taking the degree.
(Cat., 1852-53, p. 28.)
Until 1852, when Dr. Henry P. Tappan was called to the presidency of the University, its administration was in the hands of the faculty and the Board of Regents. Tappan was thoroughly in accord with the German system of education and felt that there should be a preparatory period in our system to correspond with the German Gymnasia, and that this should be followed by higher instruction by means of lectures, library work, and the use of other facilities for the encouragement of higher learning. He considered the lecture method to be of true university character as opposed to the textbook and recitation work of the lower college. In accord with his ideas this statement appears in the Catalogue for 1852-53:
It is proposed, therefore, at as early a day as practicable, to open courses of lectures for those who have graduated at this or other institutions, and for those who in other ways have made such preparation as may enable them to attend upon them with advantage. These lectures, in accordance with the educational systems of Germany and France, will form the proper development of the University, in distinction from the College or Gymnasium now in operation.
(Cat., 1852-53, p. 21.)
The so-called “University Course” was designed for those who had taken the degree of bachelor of arts or the degree of bachelor of science, and for those generally who, by previous study, had attained a preparation and discipline to qualify them for pursuing it. The announcement stated:
The Course will be conducted exclusively by lectures. Besides attending these the student will have full opportunity of availing himself of the library and all other means that can aid him in literary cultivation and scientific researches.
This Course, when completely furnished with able professors and the material of learning, will correspond to that pursued in the Universities of France and Germany.
(Cat., 1852-53, p. 26.)
This statement is followed by a plan presenting twenty subjects as proper to such a course, but there is no mention of advanced degrees in connection with it. Advanced degrees continued to be granted in course on the old basis. The first master’s degrees in course were granted in 1849, when the honor was conferred upon two candidates, Merchant H. Goodrich, of Ann Arbor, and Winfield Smith, of Monroe. Degrees granted in the following years numbered as follows: 1850, 5; 1851, 4; 1852, 6; 1853, 4; 1854, 18. In 1855 none were conferred. It is possible that the new rules relating to examinations and theses were being enforced at this time, making it more difficult to qualify for the degree.
Although President Tappan’s plan for graduate work appeared in the Catalogue of the University as early as 1852-53, nothing further was done with regard to it until 1858-59, when definite rules were adopted for granting the degrees of master of arts and master of science “upon examination,” and they were to be conferred respectively upon those who held the bachelor of arts and bachelor of science degrees, according to the following conditions: (1) The candidate had to be a graduate either of the University of Michigan or of some other collegiate institution empowered to confer degrees, (2) he must have taken at least two designated courses in each semester, (3) he was to take an examination in at least three of the studies thus attended, the subject to be of his own choice, and (4) he was required to present a thesis in one of the subjects chosen for examination. In this way a second degree might be obtained one year after the first degree had been granted. The courses offered were not restricted to candidates for the master’s degree, but were open to all who gave satisfactory evidence of ability to profit by them. The master’s degree in course continued to be offered as before. The first degrees to be given upon examination were granted in 1859.
President Tappan entertained great hopes for the future of the graduate program. In 1859 he reported:
In these higher courses we are advancing to the scope and dignity of a true University and maturing the noble plans of the founders. Nor need we despair of success. The more we enlarge our facilities of affording education, the more we extend our influence. Those Institutions will ultimately command the highest success, which most deserve it.
(R.P., 1837-64, p. 817.)
Mention was made of the alumni receiving the degree of master of arts “upon examination according to our recently adopted University regulations for the higher degree … The new regulations above referred to form an important step in the progress of our honored Institution towards a proper and full University development.” Then followed a statement of the regulations and the program offered under them:
The mere exhibition of such a programme is gratifying as an indication of what we would do. We are not without hope, however, that even the year upon which we have just entered will not close without the inauguration of the higher course, at least, not without some worthy scholarly attempts at its inauguration.
(R.P., 1837-64, p. 876.)
The new program, however, apparently did not prove very popular. The majority of the master’s degrees continued to be granted in course. Until 1871, a period of thirteen years, only fifteen degrees had been granted upon examination. The war undoubtedly had something to do with this, but the chief factor probably lay in the difficulties that arose between President Tappan and the Board of Regents and in the change of administration that followed. In 1863 Tappan was succeeded by Erastus Otis Haven, and he in turn was followed by Henry Simmons Frieze, who served as Acting President from 1869 to 1871.
In his report of 1871 Acting President Frieze remarked:
One Master of Arts, it will be observed, has received his degree upon examination in post graduate studies. It is much to be wished that this class of students may increase in number. The marked success in professional life of the few who have thus far pursued post graduate courses, should invite more of the alumni to undertake it; especially those who have taken the first degree at so early an age that there is no occasion for haste in preparing for a profession.
(R.P., 1870-76, p. 120.)
The feeling was growing that more significance should be given to the higher degree. A strong impetus must have been given toward this end by President Angell, who came to the University in 1871. In his report to the Regents in 1874, as spokesman for the Literary faculty, he said:
The members of the Literary Faculty, impressed with the importance of giving a higher significance to our Masters’ Degrees, respectfully requested you to confer no second degrees in course after 1877, and their opinion met with your hearty approbation. Accordingly after that date Masters’ Degrees will be given only on examination. Heretofore a Master’s Degree has been valuable only as a certificate that a person, who had graduated Bachelor, had existed three years after his graduation. We propose now that it shall really signify the acquisition of larger attainments than are required for the Bachelor’s Degree. No one can receive it, who shall not have done a year’s good work in post-graduate studies, here under our direction, or two years’ work elsewhere, the value of which is to be determined by examination.
(R.P., 1870-76, pp. 393-94.)
Provision was also made to grant the degree of doctor of philosophy to those who studied for at least two years after obtaining a bachelor’s degree. The change in the requirements for the master’s degree seems to have been generally approved by educators of the day, and the granting of the degree only upon examination apparently had a wholesome influence upon postgraduate work.
In 1877 President Angell again mentioned that the degree of master in course would be discontinued after that year:
We may therefore reasonably expect that the number of applicants for the degrees on examination will increase. We desire it to be understood that the examinations for the second degrees are by no means a mere form. We make them rigorous and searching. We intend that the degrees shall have a real significance.
(R.P., 1876-81, p. 152.)
There does not seem to have been any great increase in the number of master’s students enrolled, however. A few degrees in course continued to be granted every year up to 1884. No reason is given for this, but presumably it took care of a few who had previously signified their intention of seeking the degree.
In 1880, while President Angell served as minister to China, Acting President Frieze called attention again to the German system and likened the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts to the German Gymnasium. He deplored the fact that universities in America were giving their strength chiefly to the work of the secondary, rather than to the higher, education. He expressed the hope that in place of the bachelor’s degree the master’s degree would gradually be preceded by “certificates of proficiency or maturity.” He said: “It is manifestly difficult, if not impossible to change the Gymnasium into a University by merely building up a system of post-graduate courses, as a sort of annex to the old established curriculum of four years; …” (R.P., 1876-81, p. 576).
Under an arrangement spoken of as a “new departure” a student might be recommended for the master’s degree without having taken the bachelor’s degree, provided he gave notice of such a purpose at least one year before he applied for the degree, chose courses approved by the faculty, and presented a satisfactory thesis. Dr. Frieze said of this arrangement:
It emancipates the student from the trammels of fixed courses at the period when he is sufficiently advanced in age and discipline, to choose and pursue his studies for himself as an individual, and according to his individual gifts, attainments, and necessities. And this is precisely the characteristic of university work for the Master’s degree, as distinguished from gymnasial or lyceum work for the Bachelor’s degree…
Our Faculty should as soon as possible cease to expend all their time and strength on that which ought to be the work of the High School; thus compelling our more ambitious students to resort to foreign universities to obtain their higher education. For they should get their whole education at home.
(R.P., 1876-81, pp. 577-78.)
A first attempt to put this system into action was made with the establishment of a School of Political Science in 1881. The course of study in this School was to cover a period of three years, and students might be admitted upon completion of the first two years in the University and the so-called “required studies.” The degree to be given was that of doctor of philosophy. The following year, in 1881, the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts asked permission to grant the doctoral degree under the same condition, and this was approved. With respect to this new departure Dr. Frieze reported in 1881:
We should remember, too, that while the candidate is admitted to examination at the end of five years’ residence, it by no means follows that the degree will be awarded. The examination must not be a mere matter of routine, and the award of the degree a foregone conclusion, … It must be emphatically an university examination, made by responsible committees or boards, … He is to be tested, … like a full-grown man and scholar, as to what he himself has found out and thought out under the general guidance and direction of those whom he chooses for instructors.
(R.P., 1881-86, p. 111.)
The program as outlined seems to have met with general favor, for in 1882 the faculty presented a plan to the Regents for graduate work. After a student had completed the first two years he was to choose whether he would continue his work on the “credit system” or on the “university system.” The student working on the credit system would get his bachelor’s degree at the end of his fourth year of residence. The student who selected the “university system” would be admitted to a special examination not earlier than his fourth year, and the degree conferred might be either a bachelor’s or a master’s degree; however, presentation of a thesis was necessary for the master’s degree. The doctorate was to be conferred only upon persons who had previously received a bachelor’s or a master’s degree. A minimum of two years was required before a student could present himself for the doctor’s examination, except that with a master’s degree and with some special mark of distinction he might present himself after one year.
A student on the “university system” might gain a master’s degree only by his attainments and by presentation of a meritorious thesis. According to President Angell’s report in 1882:
It is expected that those who seek a degree upon the University system will pursue a somewhat freer method of study than others, and will concentrate their labor on a few studies with the purpose of making large attainments in them, rather than of making limited attainments in many studies. It is hoped that a manly and enthusiastic spirit of investigation and research will be fostered, and that scholarship of a lofty type will be stimulated. We are aware that we are taking a very important and a bold step. But it is not the first time that this University has taken bold steps.
(R.P., 1881-86, p. 270.)
The so-called “seminary system” of study was introduced at about this time. In 1883 President Angell reported:
We have found what is known in Germany as the “seminary” method of work to be peculiarly adapted to secure the best results in advanced work in certain branches, … A small group of students, say ten, is organized for this kind of work. The plan generally followed is substantially as follows: At each meeting some one presents a carefully prepared paper on some assigned topic, a critique upon the paper is read by another member, and then all the others, who have been required to study upon the subject, discuss the topic in presence of the Professor who, himself, sums up the arguments in conclusion…
We now have so large facilities for guiding the studies of graduates that we are hoping, and not without good grounds, to attract hither an increasing number, not only of our own graduates, but also of the graduates of other institutions, whose means of giving advanced instruction are not so ample as ours.
(R.P., 1881-86, pp. 388-89.)
In his reports of 1884 and 1885 he expressed himself as highly gratified with the success of the “University System” and answered criticisms that had been made:
The tendency of the system is to lead scholars to pursue their work in a most generous, unartificial, and earnest spirit, and to accomplish more than they would under the mere stimulus of the ordinary class-room methods.
(R.P., 1881-86, p. 494.)
The fear often expressed that students will generally abuse or unwisely use the liberty granted them of choosing to some extent their studies has not been shown by our experience to be well founded.
(R.P., 1881-86, p. 598.)
In spite of the serious attempts to improve graduate work during these early years graduate students were not numerous. In the decade between 1880 and 1890 only 116 advanced degrees were granted, an average of about eleven a year. There were certain difficulties in the way. No fellowships or other aids were available for gifted scholars, the increase in undergraduate attendance made it difficult for the faculty to devote time to graduate work and to advanced students, and library facilities were not adequate. These were considered in President Angell’s report to the Regents in 1887:
In this connection we may properly recognize with grateful appreciation the effort which the alumni are making to establish one or more fellowships, to be tenable by our graduates. The generous friends of the University can most effectively contribute to its usefulness and to the promotion of advanced scholarship by endowing fellowships, yielding from four hundred to six hundred dollars a year. Such assistance will enable a few gifted scholars to remain for a period after graduation and receive the amplest culture which we can here impart.
It must, however, be remembered by us that the development of the post-graduate work makes larger demands on the time of the Professors and so increases the necessity of giving them more help for the instruction of the undergraduates … an increase in the number of graduate students, no two of whom, it may be, are pursuing the same line of studies, entails upon the Professors a much larger proportionate increase of labor than the addition of an equal or a much larger number of undergraduates.
(R.P., 1886-91, pp. 150-51.)
Librarian C. C. Davis in the same year emphasized the needs of the library:
The Post Graduate work which was contemplated when the University began her career, and which has never been lost sight of, had its beginning practically in this last decade. The widest range is given to these students in their choice of work. But limitations in that choice are reached, as soon as, in arrangement of details, an account is taken of books. In some cases there is not a volume; in others only a few — in very few cases are there all that are necessary.
(R.P., 1886-91, p. 169.)
It is noteworthy that of the eighty-four graduate students and candidates for higher degrees in 1889-90 twenty-two were women.
In 1891 President Angell mentioned for the first time the need of some new organization to give proper attention to graduate students:
No scholars, who go forth from our walls, do more for the reputation of the University. It is therefore of the first importance that we encourage such work as theirs… I propose to ask the Faculty of the Literary Department to give consideration to the subject of organization of the graduate work, and to report to you at some future time.
(R.P., 1886-91, p. 563.)
At the close of the year 1891-92, the faculty of the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts decided to establish a graduate school. This action grew out of the conviction that the time had come to provide numerous advanced courses developed from the extensive use of the elective system. The necessity for a systematic and efficient administration of graduate work and, as far as possible, for separate instruction of graduate students was recognized. The management of the new school was entrusted to an Administrative Council of which the President was chairman. The council for the year 1892-93 consisted of the heads of departments. No essential changes were made in the rules already existing except that the master’s degree for work in absentia, which had been granted for a few years, was to be discontinued after 1893-94.
President Angell pleaded in his report for the recognition of the new organization and called attention to further needs in connection with this work:
The Faculty feel, and with reason, that we ought to improve every opportunity to do well that advanced literary and scientific teaching which may be regarded as the university work … we should be glad to encourage and to invite graduates to take up the higher ranges of study with us, and should strive to furnish them as good facilities for such study as are afforded anywhere in the country. The demand for such facilities is rapidly increasing. The stronger universities are very properly striving to meet it. If we are not to fall behind them, we must also do our utmost to promote this advanced instruction. The importance of such instruction to American scholarship can hardly be overrated. It is absolutely essential to the training of teachers for our colleges and our other institutions of higher learning … It is, in fact, the genuine university work which we have for many years been desirous of doing. Dr. Tappan, with his broad vision and his true conception of the function of a university, attempted in his day to prepare the way for it. And the Faculty have never lost sight of the ideal which he pictured…
By their own action they have endeavored to secure the best organization of the work that we can have with our present means, and have given to the organization the name of Graduate School… Assistants must be furnished, maps, charts, photographs, apparatus for research must be provided. A liberal supply of books of a class not required for the general purposes of the library must be had. In short, a considerable addition to our present expenses is involved. This is stated frankly so that there may be no misunderstanding on the part of the Regents or of the public… We have reached so critical a point in our history, it is so obvious that we must now either accept a position in the rear of the larger universities with which we have long been keeping pace in the highest university work, or else make a vigorous forward movement.
(R.P., 1891-96, pp. 78-80.)
Although the Regents undoubtedly did what they could in providing for the needs of the newly organized Graduate School, the appropriation of funds came slowly. Each year President Angell emphasized the needs of the School for better library facilities, increased faculty, and provision for fellowships. In his report of 1896 he said:
The question, therefore, with which this University and the other large State Universities is confronted is this; are the States willing to furnish the means for providing this kind of instruction? Just now, there is no more important question concerning higher education to be passed on by our western States. Upon the answer to be given to this question it depends whether the State Universities are to have their development arrested at their present stage, and so are to fall behind the universities, which depend for their support on private endowments.
(R.P., 1891-96, pp. 660-61.)
Acting President Harry B. Hutchins in his report of 1897 spoke discouragingly about the development of the graduate work. Attendance had increased slightly, but the growth and prosperity of the Department had not been what they should have been had the necessary funds for development been forthcoming: “Under existing circumstances, we can conduct graduate study only in connection with the undergraduate work and as incidental thereto.”
The need for fellowships seemed so urgent that a committee consisting of Burke A. Hinsdale, George A. Hench, Henry S. Carhart, Albert B. Prescott, and Francis W. Kelsey was appointed in 1899 to study the problem. In calling attention to the report of this committee, President Angell said “… we trust that the attention of our friends will be directed to it.”
Summer session work was instituted in 1900, and it was provided “that time spent by graduate students at the Summer Session shall be counted the same pro rata as that spent at other sessions of the University, provided that no student shall receive a degree who is not regularly matriculated in the University” (R.P., 1896-1901, p. 477).
By the year 1900 ninety students were enrolled in the Graduate Department, fifteen more than in the previous year. Seventy-nine colleges besides the University had been represented by students during the eight preceding years. There were 108 students in 1901, a gain of eighteen over the previous year. Several fellowships had been supported and they proved helpful and encouraging. In his report of 1901 President Angell called attention again to the needs for graduate study:
We are seriously lacking in adequate accommodations for the advanced students, both undergraduates and graduates, in carrying on what is known as seminary work, in which immediate access to a considerable number of selected books, and the supply of rooms for the meeting of small sections for conference and discussion in proximity to the books, are necessary. Few innovations in the method of University instruction have been more fruitful of good results than the introduction of the seminary method, which has found its way into all the best institutions in the country. It is believed that it was introduced here earlier than at any other American University. We should not fall behind other institutions in reaping the largest results from it.
(R.P., 1896-1901, p. 703.)
The Graduate Department had been organized as a part of the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts, of which the Graduate Council was technically a committee. This soon created difficulties in connection with graduate work in other departments on the campus. Engineering had been organized as a separate department in 1895, and the departments of Law and Medicine had been in existence a long time. The Administrative Council had also grown so large that it no longer constituted a practical body for the administration of affairs. As first organized the council was to consist of the President as chairman, a secretary appointed by the council, and the heads of the various departments in the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts. In 1896 the council included the professors and junior professors in the department and such persons as might be elected to membership.
It was gradually recognized that graduate study was peculiarly a University interest and not a departmental one. The Research Club, established in 1900, may have contributed to this feeling, since it served to bring the research interests in all fields closer together. In 1901 a memorial was presented to the Regents asking for the establishment of a separate graduate unit representing the entire University. Plans were included for the election of an administrative council of nine members and for the election of a dean by the council. This memorial was turned over to the Finance Committee of the Board of Regents, and the following resolution was adopted by the full vote of the Board in March, 1902: “Your committee, to whom was referred the memorial for the establishment of a Graduate School as a separate department, beg to report that it has considered the same, along with the protest lodged against such action, and the committee recommend that no action be taken” (R.P., 1901-6, p. 32).
There was, apparently, opposition to any change, but those who were interested in the school did not lose courage. In 1903 Regent Henry Dean presented to the Board a communication from Dr. Vaughan and fifty other members of the faculty asking again for the establishment of a graduate school, but this was tabled and no action taken. A month later Dr. A. B. Prescott presented a communication to the Regents, asking for a conference with the Board by a committee interested in the establishment of a graduate council in the University. This communication was referred to the committee of the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts. Nothing further was heard of it. It is evident that the faculty of the Literary Department was reluctant to give up full control of graduate work and was putting obstacles in the way of any change.
By 1907, when the Graduate Council had grown to fifty-five members, it was decided that its functions should be performed by a smaller body, the Administrative Council of the Graduate School. It consisted of eleven members of the faculty of the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts, to be appointed by the President — three for three years, four for two years, and four for one year — and subsequent appointments to be for three-year terms. The council was to elect its own chairman and secretary, to represent the various departments offering graduate work, to administer all affairs of routine, and to make recommendations to the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts. Later, the Dean of the Literary Department was made a member of the council ex officio. The organization was still purely one within that department.
In 1910, for the first time, recognition was given to graduate work in the professional departments. In October of that year it was resolved “that such courses in the professional departments of the University as meet the approval of the Administrative Council of the Graduate School, shall be accepted in fulfillment of the requirements for higher degrees” (“Minutes, … L.S.A.”).
In 1910 the Regents appropriated money for the establishment of University fellowships. Although $5,000 was requested, the Regents granted only $3,000, and this seems to have been ample, since $750 remained unassigned, on the claim that there was a dearth of first-class applicants because of the lateness of the appropriation. Thus, at last came the support for worthy students for which President Angell had been pleading for twenty years.
Protests continued against the narrow organization of the work. In February, 1911, a resolution was passed that a committee be appointed “for the purpose of studying the problem of graduate work in the University and reporting a scheme of reorganization if such course seems to the committee to be wise.” The committee consisted of Regents Sawyer, Beal, and Hubbard, and, as Senate members, Deans Vaughan and Reed, and Professors F. N. Scott, Wenley, and Ziwet, with the President as chairman.
In December the committee submitted its recommendations which were adopted:
1. That a Graduate Department be established in the University. 2. That a Dean for this Department be appointed by the Honorable Board of Regents on the recommendation of the President. 3. That the management of the Department be vested in an Executive Board of seven, together with the President and the Dean of the Department; that this Board be appointed by the Honorable Board of Regents on the nomination of the President and the Dean; that the term of office on the Board be seven years, one member to retire each year.
(R.P., 1910-14, p. 313.)
Karl Eugen Guthe (Ph.D. Marburg ‘89) was appointed the first Dean of the Graduate Department, and Henry C. Adams, Fred N. Scott, Robert M. Wenley, Moses Gomberg, Mortimer E. Cooley, Victor C. Vaughan, and Henry M. Bates were appointed members of the Executive Board. In September lots were drawn for term of service with results as follows: Gomberg, one year; Bates, two years; Wenley, three years; Cooley, four years; Scott, five years; Vaughan, six years; Adams, seven years.
The new Graduate Department was made wholly independent of any special faculty and had its own budget for administrative purposes. The Executive Board represented the various groups of study. Although the new department had no faculty of its own, it had at its disposal the members of all the faculties, as well as the resources of the University.
The task of reorganization was not an easy one, but Dean Guthe and the Executive Board entered upon their duties with enthusiasm. Dr. Guthe was a comparatively young man, who had no ties with the old organization and thus, was not hampered by University tradition. During his three years of service he did much to place graduate work in the University on a high level. His unfortunate death in 1915 was a great loss to the University.
Professor Alfred Henry Lloyd (Harvard ‘86, Ph.D. ibid. ‘93) was appointed Dean of the Graduate School in October, 1915. Major departments were named “schools” or “colleges” from this date. In 1920-21 the Executive Board was changed from seven to eight members so appointed that two were to retire each year. Term of office was to be four years. Members were to be chosen so as to represent different fields of study. Dean Lloyd, while serving as Acting President of the University, died on May 11, 1927 (see Part IV: Department of Philosophy). He was succeeded as Dean by G. Carl Huber (M.D. ‘87, Sc.D. hon. Northwestern ‘30). Dean Huber died December 26, 1934 (see Part V: Department of Anatomy). In 1935 Clarence S. Yoakum (Campbell ‘01, Ph.D. Chicago ‘08) was appointed Dean, and Peter O. Okkelberg (Minnesota ‘06, Ph.D. Michigan ‘18), who had been Secretary of the School since 1930, became Assistant Dean.
The first secretary of the graduate division of the University was Professor W. H. Pettee, who served from 1892 to 1903, when he was succeeded by Professor Alfred H. Lloyd. Professor Walter Dennison succeeded Lloyd in 1905, and he was followed by Professor Edward H. Kraus in 1908.
Recognizing the new department as pre-eminently for the encouragement of research, the Regents in 1913 placed the publications of the University under its jurisdiction. It was specified that the Executive Board might, at its discretion, enlarge the range of publication so as to include any field. The successive reports of the Graduate School indicate the increasing number and importance of these works. In 1920 the Executive Board did not spend its appropriation for publications because the amount available would not cover the costs of production. The need for a press, with adequate publication funds, was presented to the Regents in a report prepared by a special committee of the Research Club. This report urged the continued support of existing publication series, the establishment of new series, the organization of a University press, and the placing of a special fund in the hands of the Dean for furthering research activities. No action on these matters was taken at the time. Nevertheless, the Executive Board continued to receive increasing financial support for publication. In 1922 Dr. Eugene S. McCartney (Pennsylvania ‘06, Ph.D. ibid. ‘11) was appointed Editor of Scholarly Publications.
In 1930 the University of Michigan Press was established with Frank E. Robbins (Wesleyan ‘06, Ph.D. Chicago ‘11) as Managing Editor. Authorization for publication in the several series and the budget remained under the administration of the Executive Board of the Graduate School. Control of editing and production was transferred to the Administrative Committee of the University Press in the following year. The final transfer of control of publications to the University Press occurred in 1935. At that time the Committee on Scholarly Publications was created, with membership representation from the several divisions, the Dean of the Graduate School and the Managing Editor of the Press holding office ex officio.
Closely associated with the more technical problems of publication, and a more vital element in the development of a graduate school, is the encouragement of research. One form of such encouragement is the issuing of faculty bibliographies. The earliest of these is apparently the list in the first number of the University Record, which appeared in April, 1891, and covered books and articles between October, 1889, and October, 1890. The Record printed the list annually for five years, when it was taken over by the Michigan Alumnus. The list printed in June and July, 1897, covered the period from October, 1894, to May, 1897. Irregular publication in the Alumnus and the News-Letter covered a part of the period to 1899. The University of Michigan News-Letter printed lists from 1899 through 1905. By authorization of the Regents, the Librarian, T. W. Koch, published the bibliographies of the faculty from January, 1906, through June, 1909. In 1919, Dean Lloyd renewed the record of scholarly contributions for the period 1909-18. With the exception of 1930-33, when the report covered a three-year period, this report has appeared biennially either as a part of the President’s Report, or separately.
Although the Executive Board was placed in full charge of publications, and soon thereafter appropriations of twelve to fifteen hundred dollars a year were at the disposal of the Board, the main dependence was on gifts from friends of the University. The Regents established a separate trust fund for research in 1925. By this time, also, the sum available had risen to $12,000. In 1930-31 the amounts available were $22,000 for publications and $30,000 for research. These funds for publication are now under the control of the Committee on Scholarly Publications.
Funds for research derive from at least four sources. Departmental budgets and personal financing are responsible for the numerous publications issued by faculty members. Special appropriations from general funds, including the Faculty Research Fund, are mentioned throughout the history of the University. Within recent years special grants from foundations, friends of the University, and alumni have become a large factor in the support of research. Endowments specifically for research have not accumulated rapidly until recent years. The Regents, however, have appropriated sums for such projects from income from general endowments. The W. W. Cook Foundation was established in 1929, but is primarily for specific purposes all closely related to the functions of the Law School. The Rackham Fund was established in 1935. Other endowments such as the Alexander Ziwet Fund are partly available for research projects.
The following table gives the sums received from outside sources from 1897 to 1941.
TABLE I
Current and Continuing Funds for Research by Five-Year Periods
Years Amounts
1897-1901 $ 1,760.83
1902-1906 1,031.25
1907-1911 1,481.25
1912-1916 8,585.25
1917-1921 50,677.96
1922-1926 360,562.28
1927-1931 1,284,516.32
1932-1936 979,511.21
1937-1941 1,053,364.71
Mr. Horace H. Rackham had been, during his lifetime, a generous donor to the research funds of the University, and in his will he established the Horace H. Rackham and Mary A. Rackham Fund. The trustees of the fund, Mrs. Mary A. Rackham, Mr. Bryson D. Horton, Mr. Clarence E. Wilcox, Mr. Frederick G. Rolland, and Mrs. Myra H. Bussey, studied his gifts and became convinced that the purposes he hoped his fortune would realize must necessarily issue from increases in the knowledge of human history and human thought. Assured of the soundness of this view the trustees gave to the University of Michigan, on September 7, 1935, $5,000,000 to perpetuate Mr. Rackham’s faith in study and research. This sum was later augmented, on November 1, 1935, by the addition of $1,500,000.
The capital sum of $4,000,000, by action of the trustees and the Regents of the University, became a perpetual endowment, the income of which is used by the University in extending the boundaries of knowledge and its applications to human welfare. The remainder was segregated to purchase land and erect a suitable building in memory of Mr. Rackham.
The building is situated on the two blocks north of the Michigan League Building and Hill Auditorium. The principal elevation, the south, is on a direct line with the University Library, and the space between the two buildings is called the Mall.
The offices of the trustees of the Horace H. Rackham and Mary A. Rackham Fund have occupied the rooms in the west wing of the main floor. In the east wing are the various offices of the Graduate School. The facilities of the building are designed to permit social activities among the graduate students. Small study rooms and conference and common rooms are provided. A large study hall, library, and periodical rooms are furnished for those who wish to read uninterruptedly or to browse in scholarly fields other than their own.
In the recesses of the building, above the lecture hall, and in the basement are large, airy rooms for those who wish to work in quiet on problems calling for days and weeks of continuous effort. None of these rooms is permanently assigned to graduate students, to any group of graduate students, nor to any faculty research project. They are, however, available for the period of a project to those who are engaged in formal research tasks that are financed by income from endowments.
In different sections of the building, particularly on the intermediate floor, are exhibition rooms for demonstration of techniques and results of research to campus gatherings and to scientific and learned societies which meet in Ann Arbor as guests of the University. The scheme of the building includes facilities for housing small and medium-sized scientific and scholarly organizations.
By these gifts to the University — the assurance of permanent support in research and a building to house Graduate School activities — the trustees felt that they could most materially and adequately assist progress in the graduate field.
The Executive Board has given much time to consideration of methods for promoting research. A plan adopted by the Regents in 1921 gave the Board power to establish a research division in connection with any department in the University. Research professors, associates, and fellows were authorized, whose duties of instruction were to be limited to work with approved graduate students. Other provisions included use of all facilities of the University and the appointment of special committees which would be responsible for the monies assigned to them for research and publication.
Financial support was not immediately forthcoming, and the plan did not develop in the form proposed. Bureaus such as the Bureau of Educational Reference and Research in the School of Education, the Bureau of Government, the Bureau of Business Research, the Lawyers’ Club Research Fund, the Simpson Memorial Institute, the Institute of Public and Social Administration, the Land Utilization Research Committee, the Institute of Archaeological Research, the Fine Arts Development Fund, the Neuropsychiatric Institute, the Bureau of Industrial Relations, and the Institute for Human Adjustment, have all come into existence since the plan was proposed. Though not precisely following the original plan, they may be thought of as forms of research organizations which stem from the proposals of the Executive Board. Closely associated with the University, though independently supported, are the Institute for Fisheries Research, the State Highway Engineering Laboratory, the Michigan Children’s Institute, and the Michigan Child Guidance Institute.
The direction of growth, as proposed in the Executive Board’s plan of 1921, was conceivably based on the strengthening of research activities through departmental organizations. Certain weaknesses appeared in the plan. The members of the staff of a department are all more or less engaged in research. To single out particular individuals or to appoint new men with circumscribed functions violates this condition. It also differs from the theory that conceives the most satisfactory status to be one in which the investigator teaches, as well as directs, his special group of research assistants. Again, the rapid growth of interdepartmental fields of research has made it desirable to develop a more inclusive and, at the same time, more flexible type of organization.
The rise of the institutes indicates the increasing funds available for research purposes. Moreover, funds came for specific purposes which were generally just outside the research objectives of the departments. Suitable as the institute is for concentrated research and for drawing support, it does not bring departments together in the investigation of problems lying intermediate between them, nor does it often stimulate members of a teaching staff to attempt research.
In 1929, at the suggestion of President Ruthven, the Division of Fine Arts was established. A division was defined as a grouping of units and departments for the purpose of co-ordinating various allied activities and of developing a general field. Its function was advisory. Its specific duties of advice and recommendation concerned the interrelations of its several curriculums, the encouragement of individual research, and the promotion of co-operative investigations.
The principal value of the concept was to establish closer relations between the departments grouped within a division. The division was represented before the Executive Board by a special committee on research. These committees gave valuable criticism on projects and familiarized themselves with types of current investigation.
An excerpt taken from a brief history of the School prepared in 1920 by Dean Lloyd at the request of President Hutchins will serve to summarize the early history of scholar and fellowship aid:
No history of the Graduate School should omit mention of the fellowships which for a number of years, thanks partly to private generosity, partly to official appropriation by the Regents, the Executive Board has had at its disposal. Until 1911 the number of fellowships was small, beginning at none and for the decade before 1911 being from six to ten in amounts varying from two to five hundred dollars. The first was the Elisha Jones Classical Fellowship. This and all the earlier fellowships were given to the University. But in 1911 the Regents established ten University Fellowships, with stipend of three hundred dollars each, and only a year later, when the reorganization took place, they added five University Fellowships of five hundred dollars each and also ten State College Fellowships of three hundred dollars each. The latter have been reserved especially for properly accredited graduates of the state colleges, the holders being nominated by the faculties of the different colleges, approved by the Executive Board, and finally appointed by the Regents. The University Fellowships have been general as to students eligible and also as to subjects of study. Any accredited graduate, from the University of Michigan or from any other approved college or university, from the United States or from any foreign country, may be appointed, the essential tests determining appointment being manifested ability and performance in any field of study in which the University is prepared to give graduate work. Besides the fellowships already named, the School has received by special gifts, in many cases dependent on annual renewals, a few fellowships given without limitations and a considerable number given for studies in specified fields from Greek and Latin to paper-making. Since 1912, except for the interruption of the war, there have been available in all from thirty-five to forty-five. A list of the donors, in some cases individuals, in some corporations, would certainly be appropriate here, if for no other reason, as a mark of appreciation, but the list is a long one and this history must be kept within certain bounds. The annual bulletins give the details in full, donors, purposes, amounts, and appointees. In several instances the amounts have been as much as twelve hundred dollars, the annual stipend, with special additional sums for expenses of materials and other incidentals.
(Hutchins Papers, Feb. 1920.)
After Dean Lloyd and Dean Huber reported on the status of special aid to graduate students, the number of all types of scholarships increased until by 1939-40 there were approximately one hundred and forty-eight. This increase came in specific grants from interested friends and industrial concerns, from specially endowed funds, and through increased appropriations from general funds. The two Alfred H. Lloyd postdoctoral fellowships, upon recommendation of Dean Huber, were created by the Regents in 1927-28. Two additional fellowships in memory of Horace H. Rackham were established in 1936-37. The ten Rackham predoctoral fellowships carrying stipends of one thousand dollars each, renewable, and demanding special qualifications,
TABLE II
Enrollment in the Graduate School
YearMichiganOther States and Terr.Foreign CountriesTotal (Exclusive of Summer Session)Summer Session
1912-13172 81 14 267128
1916-17198156 15 369202
1920-21269142 29 440240
1924-25444261 53 758583
1928-29648356 871,091950
1932-331,083494 971,6741,493
1936-371,3186321662,1161,932
1939-402,0718491633,0833,331
began somewhat earlier under a separate grant from the Horace H. Rackham and Mary A. Rackham Fund. The state college scholarships in 1940 were sixteen in number. In that year there were thirty scholarships carrying remission of tuition for assignment each year to students passing immediately from their undergraduate work to the graduate school.
Gratifying as this growth in aid to worthy students has been, there are several considerations which indicate that all requirements have not been met. Many aspiring candidates for higher degrees spend years in reaching their goal. They must constantly break their progress to teach or to work in some preliminary occupation in order to secure the money to return for an all-too-short study period. Often the best years for study and research are lost before they can return even for this brief period. Other graduate students of high ability spend precious hours in working to support themselves. Intellectual enthusiasm is dissipated by interruptions and by the draining away of energy into nonproductive effort. Nevertheless, enrollment in the School since its establishment as a separate unit has increased remarkably
TABLE III
Graduate Degrees Granted by the University, 1847-1940
DegreeDegree First GrantedTotals
Master of arts “in course”1849415
Master of arts “on examination”185941
Master of science “on examination”185915
Master of science “in course”185969
Master of philosophy “in course”187514
Doctor of philosophy18761,293
Master of philosophy “on examination”18776
Master of letters “in course”18812
Master of letters “on examination”18821
Master of arts18846,179
Master of science18841,891
Master of philosophy188446
Master of letters188519
Master of pharmacy18875
Doctor of science1889125
Mining engineer18903
Civil engineer189064
Electrical engineer189514
Master of education189632
Master of science in education1896614
Master of science in forestry1904127
Master of science in pharmacy19059
Chemical engineer19126
Master of science in public health1914150
Master of science in architecture191620
Master of landscape design191658
Doctor of public health191638
Master of arts in municipal administration191754
Master of science in chemistry192063
Master of science in municipal administration19226
Master of arts in library science.1927106
Aeronautical engineer19342
Metallurgical engineer19341
Naval architect19351
Master of science in industrial engineering19353
Master of public health19351
Master of arts in social work19365
Master of design19363
Master of science in public health engineering19382
Master of social work193812
Master of clinical psychology19401
11,516
(Table II) as has the number of degrees granted (Table III).
Primary credit should be given to the faculties of the several colleges and schools for their early recognition of the importance of graduate study. The freedom to search and to teach, inculcated by them, continues to be a prime value in our form of society.
Peter O. Okkelberg
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Announcement, Graduate School [Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, 1937 — ], Univ. Mich., 1927-40.
The Building of the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, Univ. Mich., 1938.
Calendar, Univ. Mich., 1888-1914.
Catalogue …, Univ. Mich., 1852-59, 1914-23.
Financial Report, Univ. Mich., 1917-40.
Hinsdale, Burke A.History of the University of Michigan. Ed. by Isaac N. Demmon. Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich., 1906.
Horace H. Rackham and Mary A. Rackham Fund, Detroit and Ann Arbor, 1934-1940. Ed. by Frances H. Miner. Ann Arbor: Published by the Trustees, 1940.
Lloyd, Alfred H. MS, [Letter, February, 1920].In Harry B. Hutchins Papers, Univ. Mich.
MS, “Minutes of the Meetings of the Faculty of the Department of Literature, Science, and the Arts,” Univ. Mich., 1910.
President’s Report, Univ. Mich., 1858-1909, 1920-40.
Proceedings of the Board of Regents …, 1864-1940.
University Center for Graduate Study in Detroit
The University Center for Graduate Study in Detroit was established in response to the demand of those in the Detroit area who wished to continue advanced study, but were unable to come to Ann Arbor for this purpose. The Extension Service (then the Extension Division) of the University had for some years offered both undergraduate and graduate courses in Detroit, and up to six hours of such graduate work could, under certain conditions, be transferred later to the student’s graduate record and counted toward a master’s degree. Although this helped students seeking higher degrees, it did not suffice for those whose employment did not allow them opportunity to continue at the University.
The success of the extension work encouraged the University to extend extramural work. In 1933 graduate work was offered in Detroit in a program which became known as the Center for Graduate Study. At first only a limited program was presented, but as it proved a success the work was gradually expanded. This extramural work was administered by the Extension Service which from the beginning, under the general supervision of the Executive Board of the Graduate School, has handled the details connected with program arrangement, faculty, registration, and collection of fees.
After 1937-38 all graduate work taken in Detroit for which graduate credit was desired had to be taken at the Center for Graduate Study.* Thus, graduate students in the metropolitan area enrolled in the Graduate School for their graduate work. No work has been undertaken which could not be of equal standing with that offered on the campus of the University.
As the plan operated in 1940, therefore, the Center for Graduate Study was considered an integral part of the Graduate School. Full residence credit was granted for the work taken, and the student enrolled in the Center was admitted in the usual way and had to comply with the general rules and regulations which applied to students on the campus.
The program in social work has been associated, in a sense, with the Center for Graduate Study. The facilities for social work were open within certain limits to students who were eligible for admission to the courses and could take them with profit. Co-operative relations were also established with the Merrill-Palmer School and the Ford Hospital, so that certain graduate credit from these institutions could be applied toward a degree.
Clarence S. Yoakum
[Died November 20, 1945.]
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Building of the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, Univ. Mich., 1938.
Horace H. Rackham and Mary A. Rackham Fund, Detroit and Ann Arbor, 1934-1940. Ed. by Frances H. Miner. Ann Arbor: Published by the Trustees, 1940.
Proceedings of the Board of Regents …, 1921-40.
The University of Michigan, an encyclopedic survey ... Wilfred B. Shaw, editor, Volume II, Part VI, pp. 1037-1052.
