I found this book totally fascinating. The portrait of the universities given here is so instructive. I encourage everyone to read it.
@surelyhuman - what do you find fascinating about it? Insights, please, if you are able to share them.
@JBStillFlying Where do I start.
Here are a few examples
When Woodrow Wilson was President, the image of Princeton was described in his “Report on the Social Coordination of
the University” and it landed like a bombshell as described in the book. Unlike today, the University was known as “the pleasantest country club in the United States,” with absolutely no academic rigor. Wilson’s observance as quoted in the book is very revealing. Wilson tried hard, but lost the fight to ban the eating clubs with their rigid class structure and contempt for anything intellectually rigorous.
The different paths taken by Chicago and Stanford in recruiting faculty and the reputations both universities had at that time is also interesting.
As stated in the book
The faculty of Stanford was subject to criticism because their achievements in these lines are not so superior to other
universities…Then, again, the professors at Stanford are at something
of a disadvantage in not being judged by their own achievements, but are naturally compared with the first faculties of two other universities similarly founded within our memory, Johns Hopkins and Chicago…
The University of Chicago was started about the same time as Stanford University, but Presidents Harper and Jordan adopted opposite policies. President Harper, although he
had a much smaller endowment, paid unprecedentedly high prices for men of established reputation in Europe and
America, regardless of age, race, color, or previous condition of servitude; “headliners,” we used to call them. President Jordan, on the contrary, selected young men of promise, mostly those he had personally known in Cornell and Indiana.
This is specially interesting given the rabid anti-Semitism and racism that flourished in HYP at that time
Maybe that is why the author’s introduction to Chicago starts like this:
"IN our time three universities have been raised from the seed : Johns Hopkins, Leland Stanford, and Chicago. The youngest and greatest and most original of these is the University of Chicago. Scarcely had its cotyledons appeared above the surface of the Midway soil when it was seen to be a new species, a mutant. Though now that it is full grown it looks more like the rest of the genus
than we thought it was going to, still there is enough that is novel about it to make it interesting.
And some like @marlowe1 would claim, that’s still true 
Chicago always does things a little differently
There are many more interesting titbits in the book which I personally found fascinating, specially given the reputations these universities enjoy today
“Chicago always does things a little differently.” --You’re catching the tune of the place, @surelyhuman .
Interesting that some version of the distinction between Chicago and the peer schools made by this author in 1910 is still being made over a century later - along with the counter observation, also still being made, that the difference is diminishing. It may have been diminishing in 1910, but it is still with us today! As in the beginning there is a thread of contrariness at this institution and a focus on learning sans country club genteelisms that continues to the present day. You have picked up on the theme of that old book nicely.
Incidentally, finding interesting stuff in old books is the essence of a Chicago-style education. Someone with a liking for that sort of thing is probably suited for the place.
A new species is right! There is a lot here in this old 1910 book to explain the place. And to give credence to the fact that so much that’s different about UChicago started at its founding. It’s definitely worth a read, especially as the author likens the ideas coming out of the head of William Rainy Harper to bombs placed under the ivy-covered walls of higher ed at the time, expressly for the purpose of breaking down the barriers between the life of the university and the life outside. Food for thought as we watch UChicago go Test Optional in order to achieve the same basic objective.
One mere tidbit concerns the thinking behind and reason for the quarter system. Harper instituted this both to accommodate “irregular” students who could leave and return as they saw fit - many did so only during the summer quarters and many of these were a higher caliber than the students in residence throughout the year - but also to address the rather “leisurely” pace of learning that prevailed at so many other top institutions at the time. The quarters (12 weeks long in those days) encouraged both instructors (“procrastination and dilatoriness are the common vices of the scholastic temperament”) and students (described by the author as preferring and being used to a “leisurely” style) to get with the program and put forth a more focused and concentrated effort. I can only imagine that this tremendous respect for student’s time (as so many of them had other things going on like full time work throughout the year), coupled with the deliberate emphasis on academic research and graduate study, made UChicago quite popular from Day 1. Indeed, in those early years it was the forerunner among all top universities for doctorates granted (ahead of #2 Columbia and #3 Harvard).
Another tidbit is that the university from the beginning supported the free expression of all its members, no matter how radical or otherwise (in those days, apparently it was the theological seminary raising eyebrows LOL). What’s great about reading this book is that it was written in 1910 when the university was a mere 18 years old. Srong evidence that “freedom of expression” wasn’t just a marketing gimmick thought up by the current set of trustees to placate or impress some influential donors, as some more cynical cc posters (past and present) have posited.
@marlowe1 will enjoy learning that at the time the book was written, the state of Texas was sending 150 to UChicago. The author explains: "Every year the Texas students charter a special train for the University of Chicago. I should explain for the benefit of Eastern readers that this is the same geographically as if 150 Italian students came every year to Oxford. That would be alluded to by London leader-writers as ‘an epoch-making movement in education.’ "
I’m intrigued @surelyhuman, thanks for bringing the book to attention and parsing some of the info. People may critique UChicago for trying to be like Harvard, and I can see why coveting an endowment like theirs, or a generally more known brand name; what’s wrong with that, as long as the means of getting there isn’t like Harvard’s. (don’t get me wrong, Harvard is no doubt a great institution, but these other things are not going too great for them right now.)
So many facets shine at UChicago in addition to its steadfast academic rigor: free expression, inclusivity (looking so opposite of Harvard, now that their admissions practices are coming to light), forward-looking, a thought-leader, not playing it safe, stating things boldly and loudly, to name a few.
Another interesting titbit about summer from the book
[quote]
President Harper, in starting the summer work at Chicago in 1894, showed the same boldness and determination as President Eliot in introducing the elective system at Harvard. He made it the full equivalent of the other quarters, with instructors of the highest standing and full university credit for the work done. It was an astonishing success from the start, and is one of the most profitable features of the University of Chicago in every sense of the word. The work done in the summer is in general both more
thorough and more advanced than that of the winter quarters, and the university has extended its influence all over the South and West by means of it.
Other universities have imitated the plan more or less completely and with similar success
Why, then, was Yale’s summer school a failure?.. In my opinion the fundamental cause of its failure was the half-hearted spirit in which it was undertaken. It was attached to, not incorporated in, the university. It was regarded by some of the Yale men as an unpromising, if not dangerous, innovation, and full university credits were refused to the summer students. This lack of confidence in the work creates a bad impression.[\quote]
Chuckling at the comparisons on page 473, Age of the Universities, 1909:
Harvard, 273
Yale, 208
Pennsylvania, 169
Princeton, 163
Columbia, 155
Michigan, 72
Wisconsin, 61
California, 49
Illinois, 42
Cornell, 41
Minnesota, 41
Hopkins, 33
Stanford, 18
Chicago, 17
Chicago was a teenager, lol.
^ So was Leland Stanford Jr.
When my husband and I were students at Chicago 30+ years ago, the quarter in which you completed your coursework for your degree was the quarter in which you graduated. That applied to everyone, including undergraduate (most finished in the spring, however, just like they do today). Convocation, combined with the degree ceremony, was held 4 times a year in Rock. Chapel, just like in Pres. Harper’s day. That’s why Spring of 2020 will be the 533rd Convocation. In recent years they have moved convocation and all degree ceremonies to the Saturday of finals week.
Wow, I didn’t realize as early as when you graduated, JB, that convocation was held 4 times a year. I think it’s nice that they moved it to the one day, so everyone can be with their peers for the special ceremony.
@uocparent - true. But as I said, most of the college (not a huge number of kids in those days) graduated in the spring. So did Booth, Law, and other professional schools. Doctoral candidates, on the other hand, can earn their degree throughout the year (for instance, my husband earned his at the end of summer quarter). So for them to wait for their diploma and hooding is a bit of a bummer. On the other hand, you do get a larger group when you hold it once a year!
They don’t do four convocations for graduation anymore? That’s a really recent change! When my son got his AM, it was at the summer convocation (which was true of any number of his cohort as well).
^JHS my hubby got an AM at a winter convocation and a PhD at a summer convocation nearly three and a half years later. But this was 25-30 years ago. Not sure when they changed it, but June 2019 was the 532nd Convocation and June 2020 will be the 533rd.