Page images

into private homes and working for room and board, if there are no cooperative houses in the institution where they can turn their work into actual reduction of living costs. When a girl works in a private family for room and board she is frequently the only person in the family who is maintaining a college schedule. Many times the householder whom she assists, well meaning though she may be, has no real understanding of the demands for undisturbed study time and library work that a college course makes on a student. The unintentional encroachment of employers on the student's study time, the unintentional lack of sympathy and understanding of the student's difficulties in adjustment to classroom work, and above all, the failure to include the student as an integral part of the family—all these frequently create a situation too difficult for the girl to cope with. The cooperative house to a certain extent answers this self-supporting student's needs and at the same time assures her the opportunity for wholesome friendships with others who have the same problems.

The great majority of the students in the land-grant institutions are housed in living quarters provided by private enterprise. For the most part these are private houses with capacity for from 3 to 20 students. Few of them have been constructed with any eye to the needs of group living. For the most part their toilet facilities are entirely inadequate. Many times they are old residences no longer attractive enough to draw a desirable type of private resident or perhaps merely too large for the modern family. While 34 of the land-grant institutions report that they keep an approved list of rooming houses, only 26 inspect such rooms and this inspection is obviously in many cases too cursory to have real value. Moreover, although 33 of the land-grant institutions report that houses are removed from the list if unsanitary conditions are found, since only 26 inspect residences it is difficult to understand how the other 7 find out about conditions unsanitary enough to justify such removal. In more than half of the institutions reporting inspections the inspection concerned itself only with the houses where women roomed. It is quite apparent that the men students are allowed to live in any place and under any conditions that are tolerable to them.

Twenty-nine of the land-grant institutions require their women to have prior permission in order to room in other than college residences, and in all these cases this permission must be secured from the dean of women. Nine do not require such approval; these are Alabama, California, Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas, Illinois, North Carolina, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Utah. Seven of the land-grant colleges report that men must have prior permission in order to room off the campus, and two additional institutions require this for their freshmen men.

While 37 of the institutions report that they advise contracts between the landlord and the student, only 3 say that they make this an actual requirement. The proportion of students depending on private residences for their housing varies from 3 per cent to 100 per cent, with the median for men at 40 and the median for women at 11 per cent. It is a little difficult, however, to put such dependence on the percentages reported, as institution after institution accounts for far more than 100 per cent of its student body, some giving figures for as high as 145 per cent.

The number of students living at home with their parents while they are attending college ranges from 1 to 75 per cent for the men and from 1 to 100 per cent for the women, with the medians at 15 and 20 per cent, respectively. In these cases, of course, the institution does not assume responsibility for the student's living conditions unless he comes into conflict with authority because of them.

Since the colleges of the country have been, for the most part, so slow in making adequate provision for proper housing of students, the students themselves have tried to solve the problem by providing housing in social groups. The Greek-letter organizations (fraternities and sororities) are the students' answer to this problem. Although six of the land-grant institutions do not permit fraternities to exist on their campuses, and two others do not permit them for women, and while one other has no chapter houses, all the rest of the land-grant institutions find the chapter houses a real factor in caring for their student populations. From 25 to 40 per cent of the men students and from 15 to 40 per cent of the women students are housed in this way in the land-grant institutions, and 33 of the 44 institutions reporting say that they regard this as a fairly satisfactory method of housing their students. Only four report dissatisfaction with it.

In 31 of the land-grant institutions freshmen are allowed to room in the chapter houses and in 27 pledges are allowed to do so. In five additional institutions freshmen men are allowed to live in their chapter houses, while the women are not. This is in most cases a ruling of the Panhellenic Association and not of the college authorities. The cost of living as reported is slightly higher in fraternities than elsewhere in 27 of the land-grant institutions, while 11 report either that it is no higher or that it is slightly lower. Only 22 of the institutions which reported in the earlier question that they made no inspection of any houses, report inspection of fraternities, although this duty is not the province of any special oflicer. They do not designate the college authority to whom the report is made. The value of such an inspection is open to question. In the discussion of the offices of the dean of men and the dean of women, and in the discussion regarding the whole organization of sororities and fraternities, the question of the relation of these organizations to the college authorities is gone into more fully,

Food Service With the exception of California, all of the land-grant institutions operate some food service enterprise for their students. In many this takes the form of dining halls in the dormitories for men and women; 16 institutions, however, report the operation of a commons or dining hall for men and 15 the operation of such a dining hall for women, while 30 manage one or more cafeterias. The reports indicate that none of these service enterprises is run with the idea of profit and that the food is served as near cost as possible. The cafeteria would seem to be supplanting the dining hall with service, as a means of feeding the student body. The dining hall seems to hold its own only as a part of the residence hall, although even here a number of institutions report that all meals are selfservice style. Student waiters are used in 31 of the institutions, and in 18 women student waiters are used in the dining halls for women, although nowhere are they used in the dining halls for men. The compensation is usually board or its equivalent in hour wages. Twelve institutions report that their home economics department operates either a cafeteria or a lunch counter, but in each case it is considered a part of the regular class or laboratory work of the institution's home economics department, and the students receive college credit for the work done.

Eighteen of the institutions report that they examine their food handlers periodically, while 19 do not. In the cases where the examination is made it is usually at the time of engaging the employee and periodically thereafter. The examination takes place annually in most cases, but in one or two a semiannual examination was mentioned. The laxness of the land-grant institutions in examining the employees who handle food is far from reassuring in the light of our knowledge of the spreading of contagious diseases by germ carriers whose own health is apparently unaffected by the disease germs which they harbor and transmit to others.

The replies to the questions on the responsibility for sanitary conditions in the food service enterprises, including inspection of water and milk supplies, indicate about the same laxness as in the examination of food handlers. The responsibility is usually squarely on the shoulders of the manager of this department. In only seven cases does the college physician or health officer have any control over the situation and in only two is the home economics department called upon to participate. To be sure, the water and milk supplies are in the control of the city health authorities in 18 localities, but even this may not be especially satisfactory if the local health authorities are lax in the performance of their duty. It would seem to be clearly the responsibility of the institution itself to safeguard the health of its students by thorough inspection of this important department. Here again the lack of correlation between elaborate departments of health and hygiene, and elaborate food service enterprises, both of which are supposedly maintained for the welfare of the student body.

Men have always found the time of eating together that of the greatest sociability, in fact our most ritualistic social functions are built up around eating. The land-grant institutions, however, seem to be neglecting this tool of education that lies ready to their hand. The college that neglects its opportunity to inculcate good manners and social ease by means of pleasant surroundings, correct service, and dignity and beauty at the meal hours has wrought real harm to its students. For the sake of feeding more people, in a shorter time, at less cost, they have installed cafeteria service.

That many of the land-grant institutions are aware of the need for improving their practice in this direction is shown by the replies to the question concerning efforts to socialize the meal hour. Many indicate that cafeteria service creates more problems than it solves. Three institutions mention that their own student groups are making a study of the needs of their institutions in this respect. All sorts of devices were mentioned as operative in the women's residence halls to make the meal hour a pleasant and a social time. Some of these were the use of music during the meal, the inviting of distinguished guests and speakers, the cultivation of group singing, guest dinners, birthday dinners, and formality such as dressing for dinner on certain nights of the week, serving coffee in the living room after dinner, and appointment of hostesses to preside at the tables and to set the tone in group conversation. On the other hand, it was quite apparent that so far as the cafeterias and institutional commons or dining halls apart from dormitories were concerned, there was practically no effort at socialization. Only one institution mentioned that it was about to undertake a study to find means of slowing down the student rate of eating. It is to be hoped that a report of their findings will be published.

In general, it must be said that the reporting institutions seem fairly self-satisfied with the efforts they are making to furnish lodging and food to their student bodies. The best instruction in the world, the best student health service, and the best physical education departments, are nullified by such inadequate provision for real living as many of the land-grant institutions make for their students.

[ocr errors]

Chapter V.—Health Service

The present attitude of the colleges in regard to student health implies a broader idea of education than the old one of concern for the intellectual life of the student only; it is the business of the college to see that each student is physically as fit as he can be made and it is, in addition, the business of the college to provide the means whereby existing defects in the student's health may be remedied, or existing excellencies maintained.

The World War, with its exposure of the general low state of physical fitness of the men of draft age in this country, undoubtedly gave added impetus to the interest of the colleges in the matter of the general physical well-being of their student bodies. However, the establishment of a special department which concerns itself with student health goes back in the land-grant institutions many years before the World War. It has its beginning in most cases in physical education work and is an outgrowth of the students' own interest in athletics. The discovery that many students who desired to take part in athletics were unfitted for it by some basic physical defect such as a bad heart lesion or hyperthyroid condition, forced upon the attention of the institutions the necessity for some preliminary examination by competent physicians of those students who desired to take part in athletic competition. From such examination, it was only a step to requiring physical examinations of all entering students. The disclosures in these physical examinations of basic and remediable physical deficiencies made expedient the establishment of a student health service which should offer the defective student assistance in building himself up.

Reports from the land-grant institutions reveal that the stages in the development of student health service cover the widest possible range. One school reports that it provides its students neither with the services of a college physician nor with any health service facilities of any type. The picture at the other extreme is that of the most modern provision for health care in every field. Between these two extremes range the land-grant institutions, with 8 or 10 well toward the bottom of the scale, a large number in the middle, and 5 or 6 at the highest level, not only in the excellence of their hospital plants, but also in the adequacy of the specialized service provided to the student at very low cost.

« PreviousContinue »