THE ADMINISTRATIVE PERIL IN EDUCATION 495 



THE ADMINISTRATIVE PERIL IN EDUCATION 



By Peofessor JOSEPH JASTROW 



UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 



PRIVILEGES must be justified by occasion. The close of an 

 academic service of twenty-five years is the justification; the 

 privilege assumed is an indulgence in the use of the imperious pronoun, 

 first person singular — a considerable liberty of expression, as it sub- 

 stitutes conviction for argument. In extenuation I plead that I am not 

 speaking for myself, but, under the warrant of sympathy, for an un- 

 organized, probably unorganizable, group, scattered geographically, ex- 

 posed to varied intellectual climates, united by a community of inter- 

 ests, reacting similarly to common factors in experience. The only 

 singularity is a persistent concern for my professional class — a profit- 

 less solicitude for their welfare. 



Looking backward I distinguish overlapping periods of develop- 

 ment in the higher education, of divergent tendency ; nor is this a gray- 

 haired retrospect. Things move quickly in a country where each gen- 

 eration undertakes to make precedents, and an imitative subserviency 

 follows the flag of heralded success. I began my career under the im- 

 pulse of a quickened interest in intellectual callings, for which at the 

 time the Johns Hopkins University was the progressive sponsor. The 

 spirit of the movement was the emphasis upon the personality and 

 training of those who were and were to be intellectual leaders. I found 

 myself in an intensely alert democracy of learning. The feeling was in 

 the air that notable men were there doing notable work; prophets were 

 honored in their own land, the honor often echoed from abroad. My 

 most salient impression of President Gilman was and remains that of a 

 man with keen joy and pride in the discovery of unusual men, in facil- 

 itating their emergence, in proclaiming their achievements. Rank 

 counted for little and quality for much. 



The ambitious colleges were changing to universities, sometimes 

 prematurely with flourishes on paper unsupported by performance; 

 generally with a sincerity of spirit and policy. Men of my academic 

 generation felt themselves part of this progressive movement. They 

 gained a foothold, and, as a rule, rapid advancement. They were called 

 upon to occupy responsible if elastic chairs, the bright prospects off- 

 setting the shortcomings of the moment. The Ph.D.'s of the 80's 

 and early 90's felt themselves a welcome part of the university with 

 whose fortunes they linked their own, were themselves contributors to 

 its growth with a reasonable singleness of purpose and sensible com- 

 munity of endeavor. Quite naturally their engrossment in establish- 

 ing their positions kept them away from intimate concern with general 



