Difference between revisions of ".MjAxMDQ.Nzg0MDI"

From Transcribe Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 2: Line 2:
 
lines as the Strode bill, but the co-ordinate idea was more clearly expressed, the provision that co-education should not exist in the undergraduate department remaining the same and the provision for graduate and professional work being left for their manner and terms of development in the hands of the Rector and Visitors. The one addition to this bill was the provision for  the appointment by the Governor of a special board for the women's college, of which board the Rector and the President of the University were to be ex officio members. This bill was defeated in the Senate b a large majority and was not pressed to a vote in the House.
 
lines as the Strode bill, but the co-ordinate idea was more clearly expressed, the provision that co-education should not exist in the undergraduate department remaining the same and the provision for graduate and professional work being left for their manner and terms of development in the hands of the Rector and Visitors. The one addition to this bill was the provision for  the appointment by the Governor of a special board for the women's college, of which board the Rector and the President of the University were to be ex officio members. This bill was defeated in the Senate b a large majority and was not pressed to a vote in the House.
  
A very similar bill was prepared by Mr. Wyndham Meredith and introduced in 1914 in the Senate, with Messrs. Early, Rison, and Wendenburg as patrons, and Messrs. Gordon, Oliver, Field and Page in the House. This bill prohibited co-education in the professional and graduate departments as well as in the undergraduate department. It emphasized the purpose
+
A very similar bill was prepared by Mr. Wyndham Meredith and introduced in 1914 in the Senate, with Messrs. Early, Rison, and Wendenburg as patrons, and Messrs. Gordon, Oliver, Field and Page in the House. This bill prohibited co-education in the professional and graduate departments as well as in the undergraduate department. It emphasized the purpose of making women's institution a co-ordinate institution and not a co-educational one in the strict sense. It made the establishment of the college by the Rector and Board more mandatory, carried a small appropriation, provided for a special board for the women's college, but make it advisory and so subject to the established Board of the University itself. This bill, with its salient features intact, was passed by the same Senate that had rejected it two years before by a very large majority, - nine or ten, as I recall. It was defeated in the House by six votes.
 +
 
 +
It was that year that the University Alumni, having failed to meet the educational arguments and the co-ordinate college bulletin with conclusive evidence

Revision as of 21:54, 22 July 2019

-2- lines as the Strode bill, but the co-ordinate idea was more clearly expressed, the provision that co-education should not exist in the undergraduate department remaining the same and the provision for graduate and professional work being left for their manner and terms of development in the hands of the Rector and Visitors. The one addition to this bill was the provision for the appointment by the Governor of a special board for the women's college, of which board the Rector and the President of the University were to be ex officio members. This bill was defeated in the Senate b a large majority and was not pressed to a vote in the House.

A very similar bill was prepared by Mr. Wyndham Meredith and introduced in 1914 in the Senate, with Messrs. Early, Rison, and Wendenburg as patrons, and Messrs. Gordon, Oliver, Field and Page in the House. This bill prohibited co-education in the professional and graduate departments as well as in the undergraduate department. It emphasized the purpose of making women's institution a co-ordinate institution and not a co-educational one in the strict sense. It made the establishment of the college by the Rector and Board more mandatory, carried a small appropriation, provided for a special board for the women's college, but make it advisory and so subject to the established Board of the University itself. This bill, with its salient features intact, was passed by the same Senate that had rejected it two years before by a very large majority, - nine or ten, as I recall. It was defeated in the House by six votes.

It was that year that the University Alumni, having failed to meet the educational arguments and the co-ordinate college bulletin with conclusive evidence