University of Virginia Library

XLIII. Relation with Public School System

Such was the spirit, such the character of the representative
headmaster, who, during this vital period of reconstruction
and reexpansion, deeply impressed his noble
ideas as to manhood, conduct, and scholarship, upon the
minds and hearts of thousands of young men, who, afterwards,
entered the University of Virginia. He was as
directly instrumental in encouraging the vivid sense of
personal honor, and in maintaining the exacting standards
of intellectual training, which prevailed in that institution,
as the members of the Faculty themselves, who
were so profoundly interested in the preservation of both.
Without some knowledge of the principal headmasters of
this period, it would be impossible to take in fully the
extent of the fruitful and elevating influences which were
passing from the private schools to the University, and
from the University to the private schools.

Upon the province which these faithful teachers and
moral exemplars had occupied, with so much benefit to
the parent seat of learning, the public school system—
established and sustained by the Commonwealth, and extending
to persons of every social class,—began gradually
to intrude, until, in the end, the private schools were
compelled, either to shut their doors, or to modify their
scheme, if not in the sphere of their moral instruction,
at least in the sphere of their scholastic. Most of those
surviving schools which had formerly, not only trained
their pupils to be men and gentlemen, but also drilled
them thoroughly for admission into the senior classes of
the University, were ultimately satisfied to prepare for
the lower grades in that institution. The private academy,

like the University, had been constrained to yield
something of its original character through the rapid
development of the system of public education. Although
that system was adopted in Virginia as early as
July, 1869, many years elapsed before it took tenacious
root in the soil of the community. We have already
perceived how it languished during the existence of the
old plantation civilization. After the destruction of that
civilization by the arbitrament of arms, certain influences
remained which delayed, without finally preventing, the
introduction of the public schools: (i) the prejudice
against such schools, which had been inherited by the
members of the generation of Virginians upon whom
the first burden of reconstruction fell; (2) the comparative
indifference to education felt by the people at large;
(3) hostility to the suggestion that the negro, the cause
of so many calamities, should be instructed at the public
expense; (4) the costliness of building schoolhouses; and
(5) the difficulty of finding competent teachers and paying
their salaries when once obtained.

That the projected system was able, in the end, to become
a reality was attributable to the zeal, industry,
and genius of one man, W. H. Ruffner. By sheer tenacity
and unwearied repetition of the same voice crying in
the wilderness, he ultimately conveyed to the public mind
a large share of the enthusiasm which he himself felt for
public education. But long before the full fruition of
his work was perceptible, the Faculty of the University
of Virginia had the foresight to discern that it was only a
question of time when the public school would assume a
close, not to say, a commanding relation to that institution.
"Now that the State," they remarked in their
report for 1870–71, "has recognized the importance of
generally educating the masses of the people, it must admit

the necessity of regular system and graduation of instruction,
beginning at the common school and culminating
in the University; and on the other hand, it is equally
obvious that a thorough equipment and liberal endowment
of the University is also entirely essential to the
perfect success of the common school."

As the University was a State institution itself, and
founded by a man who had advocated a nicely balanced
system of public education, it was to be expected that the
policy inaugurated by Ruffner would find attentive observers,
if not actual sympathizers, among the group of
men who, at that time, controlled the affairs of that seat
of learning. Moreover, its dependence on the public
bounty probably suggested to its thoughtful authorities
the practical wisdom of identifying its interests, as far
as possible, with the cause of popular instruction. We
have seen that the admission of State students had closed
the mouths of many of its most persistent detractors,
who had been taunting it with its supposed affiliation with
the wealthy alone; and the same measure had also led to a
more liberal attitude towards it on the part of the General
Assembly. This fact had not been forgotten when the
growth of the public school system began to hold out to
the University the prospect of a still larger share of
popular favor, should it be able to couple itself efficiently
with the operation of that system,—the cherished hope,
as the Faculty knew, of Thomas Jefferson, the Father of
their own institution.

The first step taken by that body was to recommend
to the Board the establishment of eleven scholarships, to
be granted, after competitive examination, to young men
entering the University subsequent to a course of study in
the public schools. The second was to suggest the adoption
by the Visitors of the rule that the State students

should be chosen in such a manner as to connect their appointment
with the machinery of the free school system.
During the session of the General Assembly in the winter
of 1872–73, a bill was introduced which provided for the
formal admission of the University to that system; but it
failed to reach a vote, owing to the vigorous opposition
which it at once aroused.

In 1875, there was put forth a resolute effort to persuade
the Legislature to double the annual stipend of the
University. The Faculty, in urging this addition, reiterated
their conviction that this institution was the real
capstone of the public school system; and that it should
be connected with that system by formal enactment.
They recommended, as one step in this direction, that the
State superintendent of public instruction should always
serve as an ex-officio member of the Board of Visitors,—
a suggestion, which, in time, was to be adopted.

During the following year, the Faculty petitioned the
Board for authority to establish local examinations in
subjects embraced in the courses of both the common and
the high school; and in 1880, they counselled the same
body to provide, in "the regular sphere of action" of
the University, for the further training of school teachers
and of all persons who were preparing to become such.
That vocation, they said, should be placed there on the
same dignified footing as the professions of law, medicine,
and engineering. By assuming for this class of students
the character of a great normal school, the institution
would at once take its proper position at the head of the
public school system as designed in its original conception.
Already,—the Faculty pointed out,—graduates
of its different departments were discharging the duties of
teachers in the public schools. Why should not the University
concentrate on those schools a more direct influence

than it was now able to exert owing to its isolation
from the system? Economy would be subserved should
the institution be used by the State to give special instruction
to the men who wished to become public school teachers.
Why should the expense of founding a new seat of
learning for that purpose be incurred, when here was a
splendid State institution already fully equipped and organized?
It would only be necessary to establish in it,
in order to adapt it fully to normal requirements, two
full professorships,—one of pedagogy, or methods of
teaching; the other, of the English language. "We
favor the admission to this new department of women
who are already teachers, or may desire to become teachers,"
declared the Faculty, in concluding their report,—a
statement that formed the most convincing proof of how
far they were willing to go in the process of linking up
the University with the public school system.

So complete was the harmony existing between the University
and that system as early as 1880, that it won a
very favorable comment from the New England Journal
of Education. Several members of the Faculty had already
written a series of excellent text-books for the
public schools, and in order to contribute to the success
of the summer institutes, when they began to be held in
the University buildings, many of the professors cheerfully
abandoned their only opportunity of obtaining some
recreation after the confining labors of the previous term.

Again, in 1886, the Faculty appointed a committee
to pass upon the expediency of offering a course especially
suitable for the preparation of the male teachers in the
public schools; and in pursuance of its recommendation,
all these teachers, as well as the numerous superintendents,
were admitted, without payment of tuition fees, to
the academic departments during the last three months of

each session. A useful line of study in these departments
was discriminatingly laid off for their benefit. In May,
1887, a member of the Faculty was present as a representative
of the University at the annual State conference
of the county and city superintendents of the public
schools.

After the final settlement of the acrimonious controversy
over the State debt, the public school system rapidly
increased in prosperity. Its support was no longer
precarious. With this augmented stability, the summer
institutes at the University became the most important
agency to be discovered in the Commonwealth for increasing
the knowledge, and improving the skill, of the
public school teachers. Their attendance, on these occasions,
soon rose to as large a number as one thousand
persons, and even twelve hundred. Some of the most
highly trained educational experts in the whole country
were invited to deliver addresses before them. In 1894,
at the suggestion of the State superintendent, an act was
passed by the General Assembly to incorporate these institutes
with the general scheme of popular education,
and to provide a fund for their support. The University
of Virginia continued to give from year to year,
all the practical aid and moral encouragement in its power
to promote their success.

In his report, as chairman, for the session 1891–92,
Professor Thornton asked the following interesting question:
Does the University of Virginia, like the University
of Michigan, complete and crown the work that is
begun in the public school? The answer which he gave
to his own interrogatory was an emphatic negative. "A
wide gap," he asserted, "still yawns between the highest
classes of our public schools, and the lowest classes of the
State University. There are two reasons for this fact:

First, while the standard of admission required for Virginians
is nominally the same in the subjects examined
upon,—Latin, Greek, and Mathematics,—as in the best
American colleges, it is an open secret that a far higher
grade of preparation, is, to say the least, advisable. Our
best students come to us prepared at least for the intermediate
classes in these schools, and the crown of success
falls mainly to such as have already elsewhere traversed
the very field which they here survey with broader vision.
At the University of Virginia, tradition and feeling are
averse to the surrender by a professor of even the lowest
of his undergraduate work. The rawest lads contribute
to expand the energies and consume the time of our most
profound scholars. Second, for want of solidarity in
the low standard of the public schools, their highest students
must stand on tiptoe to reach up to the botton line
of the State University's demands. Our educational system
is incomplete so far as the public schools are concerned.
In Europe, there is a complete chain of schools
between the public school grade and the university grade.
They hold the position of fitting schools for the university."

It was estimated, in 1894, that there were at least
sixty high schools already in existence in Virginia, many
of which were included in the general system of public
instruction. The State superintendent at this time, Joseph
W. Southall, recommended in his report for that
year that a high school should be established in every
county as the most reliable means of articulating the common
schools with the University of Virginia. This was
the opinion of Professor Barringer also. "The high
school in each county," he said, "will give a stimulus
to every common school in the county. Boys who looked
forward to nothing more than the three years, will strive

for a high school education. For those chosen spirits
that show in the high school unusual capacity, the University
will stand ready. The University should make provision
to give every graduate of every public high school
in the State absolutely free tuition. I believe in changing
the University to get the public school, and in
changing the public school to get the University. Let
us have an organic connection throughout the entire system.
Unless the University could tap that great fountain
of national strength, the common schools, she would
fall far short of her destiny, and she has decided she
will stand by the public schools."

There was one substantial advantage which the public
school system bestowed indirectly on the University of
Virginia. Many years before the number of the latter's
students had begun to increase, that system made it impossible
for the General Assembly to pursue, as this
body had so often done before the war, a niggard policy
towards the highest seat of learning in the State.
Whether the connection between the public schools and
the University was a close one or not, the fortunes of
both were bound up together because both were dependent
upon the commonwealth. There was no longer any
real conflict, as in the earlier periods of the University's
history, between its own interests and the interests of the
schools established for the benefit of the children of the
average citizen.

When we inquire into the preparation for the University
given in the best of these public schools previous to
1895, it is found to be inferior to that given in those private
schools whose headmasters had reached such great
distinction. Not only were the teachers in the public
schools unequal in scholarship and pedagogic skill to those

who taught in the principal private academies, but, owing
to the larger size of the classes, it was more difficult for
them to meet the scholastic needs of each pupil. It is
probably no exaggeration to say that it was impossible
for the most conscientious of these teachers to satisfy the
moral needs since the bands of youth under his instruction
dispersed so soon as the recitations were completed.
On the other hand, in the private academy, a majority
of the pupils remained under the personal supervision of
the headmaster throughout the twenty-four hours; they
were brought under all the refined, and cultivated influences
of that headmaster's domestic hearth; and they
learned their most useful lessons from him, not in his
school-room, but in his dining-hall, his library, and his
drawing-room.

Had there arisen any new influence to compensate in
whole or in part for the passing of the headmaster as
represented in the consummate flower of the type? If
any compensation existed, it was to be found in that popularization
of education which the public school alone
made possible, a process that soon brought under the
teacher's eye thousands of young men and women who
would have enjoyed no advantages whatever under an exclusive
system of private academies. The opinions of
Dr. Southall and Professor Barringer demonstrate that,
before the close of the Seventh Period, 1865–1895, it was
clearly foreseen that the public high school was the
school which was destined to become the most important
tributary to the reservoir of the University; and that the
main work of men interested in advanced education in
Virginia should be to approximate the standards of that
school to the long established standards of the University,
—standards which had already found their chief support

in the scholastic and moral influences alike of the foremost
private academies as they existed before and after
the war.