COLEGIO CESAR CHAVEZ 50TH ANNIVERSARY: CELEBRATING A COLLEGE WITHOUT WALLS
On August 26, 2023, PODER: Oregon’s Latino Leadership Network, hosted an incredible commemorative and celebratory event to honor the history and legacy of the Colegio César Chávez at the Father Bernard Youth & Retreat Center in Mt. Angel, Oregon, the original site of the Colegio. Hundreds of community members, including many who were a part of Colegio’s history, participated in the event!
The OSU Special Collections and Archives Research Center’s Oregon Multicultural Archives (OMA) was honored to serve as a project partner and event planning committee member.
Below are photos of the exhibit and tabling activity!
The full day of activities was amazing!
Below are photos from the morning program:
Keynote Speaker: Dr. Gustavo BalderasCeledonio (Sonny) Montes Jr. reflecting on Colegio’s legacy
More about the event!
The day began with a morning program followed by an afternoon of family-friendly activities, viewing the exhibit, and workshops led by members of Colegio’s administration, staff, and students.
Below is information and photos shared by PODER via their newsletter:
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Soraya Trujillo.
When it comes to understanding the activism of students at OSC during WWII, scrapbooks are an exciting way to examine the events that took place. One example of this is the scrapbook of the Oregon State University chapter of Alpha Lambda Delta. The scrapbook itself is considerably large (around 2’x 1’) and has rounded edges. Several pages are falling out, as are some of the glued-in letters and photos, but nonetheless, it is chronologically organized and presented in a formal fashion. This scrapbook is an ideal example of the activism of female student-led organizations at OSU during WWII.
Formerly known as Oregon State College (OSC), there were many events that took place during the war years. For instance, during the school years of 1943-44 and 1944-45, the scrapbook highlights Victory Drives and harvest help that the chapter organized. Victory drives were fundraisers held by the nation as a whole, Oregonians, and college students at OSC to help with the war effort in the United States. These drives asked citizens to ration, collect, and recycle certain goods in order to supplement resources being allocated to the war effort. Using the Alpha Lambda Delta scrapbook, this post explores student activism during WWII, especially female-student activism, as well as the overall sense of community that emerged after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.
When it comes to student participation in the war effort, the enrollment size of OSC during the war years is important to note. The decrease in enrollment at OSC during 1943-1944 shines a light on why student-led organizations, like the Alpha Lambda Delta chapter, were important on a local and national level in regards to supporting the domestic fight against the Axis powers. The war impacted the size and composition of student enrollment, especially male enrollment. Moreover, nationally, there was a 14 percent decrease in enrollment in colleges. In other words, OSC’s decrease in enrollment was normal.[i] However, there is a significant variation in the population of Alpha Lambda Delta members during this time.
This graph is important to note due to the abnormal increase in the population of Alpha Lambda Delta during the first part of the war years: 1939-1941.
The scrapbook includes an exciting graph titled, “Graph showing the fraction of Alpha Lambda Delta members that have graduated for the years 1933-1942.” The data shows a relatively constant increase in members during the years 1940 to 1942. By the 1941-1942 academic year, the organization had grown to 59 members.[ii] Why did the Alpha Lambda Delta chapter grow despite enrollment declines at OSC during the war years? One could infer that the increase is due to Alpha Lambda Delta being an exclusively female student organization. In March 1943, the Oregon State Barometer published an article titled, “OSC Enrollment Records Drop of 23 Percent: Women Almost Equal Men in Numbers Excluding Engineers,” which explains that overall registration had dropped from 3586 students to 2753 students, a 23 percent decline. This number did not include “army engineers on the campus” who were being educated to actively serve in the military through programs at OSC.[iii] Although there was a decrease in civilian male students due to war and military-related education, OSC experienced an overall increase in women’s enrollment.
This shows Newspaper clippings of Victory Drives and harvestings that Alpha Lambda Delta took part in.
The local support that Alpha Lambda Delta mentions in their scrapbook leads to other avenues of interest. With the national war effort starting after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, national-level drives that involved everyone in the US, such as the “National Victory Scrap Drive” of October 1st to November 15th in 1943, could have ignited the need to create local drives at OSC.[iv] Alpha Lambda Delta members responded by creating their own campaigns and aid for farmers. The scrapbook, for example, contains clippings of an article titled, “Alpha Lambda Delta Sponsors Farm work.”[v] Female student-led organizations at both OSC and the nearby University of Oregon participated in various Victory drives, such as the “Victory Book Drive” mentioned in the Oregon Daily Emerald (the University of Oregon’s newspaper) in 1943, and helped local farmers with harvesting or tending to land.[vi] They too wanted to be a part of the overall national support.
This image shows Alpha Lambda Delta Sponsors working at farms to help the war effort in 1943.
Much of the student body at OSC during WWII supported the fight against the Axis powers, and female-led organizations led the charge when it came to supporting the local community. Female students helped local farmers in Corvallis and the greater Willamette Valley. A 1945 article in the Oregon State Barometer titled, “Coeds to help Harvest Beets: Alpha Lambda Delta Will Recruit Workers,” urged female students to volunteer to help local farmers. It was important, the article explained, that “each women’s living organization should be represented by at least three girls.”[vii] This article indicates that other female student organizations, in addition to the Alpha Lambda Delta chapter, were helping. More than ever, girls from each living organization at OSC needed to tend the land and harvest vegetables which would be shipped beyond the Pacific Northwest, due to the labor shortages in the war.[viii]
This image shows the support of Alpha Lambda Delta during the war. One can see the Patriotism and their need to support locally through the newspaper clippings as well as an American flag model/ figure.
Adding to the broader roles of females during the war, female faculty at OSC also helped in the fight against the Axis powers. According to historian Marty Branagan, “Women’s resistance ranged from actions adopted en masse as a gender to the work of women’s groups and individuals.”[ix] An example of this is the work of female administrators at OSC: Ava Milam, Lorna Jessup, and Maud Wilson during the war years. Ava Milam, the Dean of the School of Home Economics for more than 30 years, contributed to the nutritional program at OSC. Lorna Jessup, assistant to the Dean of Women, and her secretary created ration books for the student body. Maud Wilson, a female faculty member of the Agricultural College organized war guests into different homes around OSC.[x] These are just some of the various ways in which the female student body and faculty members at OSC contributed to the wartime effort.
Universities across the country participated in philanthropic efforts as well, a reality that created a bond between institutions. Historian George Zook explains that this bond emerged after the US government asked higher education institutions to be more involved in the war effort. Zook explains that the National Committee on Education and Defense and the United States Office of Education, “undertook to sponsor what turned out to be the largest and most representative conference of university and college executives that had ever been assembled in this country, at Baltimore on January 3-4, 1942.”[xi] This large representation of university executives at the National Committee on Education and Defense shows that universities were actively participating and wanted to help the country in any way possible.
The poster campaigns that the US military developed were also a significant reason for the profound amount of support from the home front. Why and how did this support happen? Terrence Witkowski explains that the American government used poster campaigns that exaggerated the need for certain supplies to encourage both moderation and donations. Witkowski states, “Perhaps the single largest group of frugality-themed posters was sponsored by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and asked Americans to forgo their immediate consumption and instead buy war bonds and defense stamps.”[xii] War bond posters may explain why Victory Drives and harvestings were common at OSC during the war, especially for female students who could not actively serve in the war.
Both images found in the U.S. Government Printing Office highlight the emergence of consumer frugality in 1942, also found in Witkowski’s article.
Adding onto the war bond posters, the War Manpower Act and the War Manpower Commission both effectively created a bond between the military and universities and additionally addressed female citizens as well. William Robbins explains in The People’s School: A History of Oregon State University that the US government used the War Manpower Act to enlist the help of universities. Robbins states, “Gilfillan’s inquiry on behalf of his seven young staff members elicited a response when the War Manpower Commission reiterated that all young men with scientific training should register [to actively serve the country].”[xiii] The War Manpower Act, according to the American National Archives, was established to recruit, “labor for war and essential civilian industries” which implies that the government needed male students for the war. In addition to male students needed for the war, other students and civilians could still support the nation through different means.[xiv] Although men were wanted for actively serving, other women and men who did not serve actively and were students are also highlighted in the War Manpower Commission on August 19, 1942, which states, “the War Manpower Commission plans of guidance which will help the students where they can make the most effective contribution to the war effort, including essential supporting activities.”[xv] This highlights how universities nationally could potentially help with wartime efforts as seen by the national Victory Drives or, in the case of OSC, aid to local farmers.
Whether inspired by the poster campaign or the Manpower Act, female students at OSC participated in the war effort. Much like other colleges and institutions around the nation, OSC was no exception to the increasing effort to help the war front through local support. In this perspective, the examination of the Alpha Lambda Delta Scrapbook during the war years is a great example of how female activism in colleges was part of a larger home front effort. Through this lens, we begin to see examples of how students helped during the war despite the setbacks they faced. For further research, finding student females and their narratives from this time period would broaden the understanding of their roles at OSC and overall define the roles of women during WWII.
Oregon State College Chapter of Alpha Lambda Delta Scrapbook, 1933-1952, Oregon State University Special Collections and Archives Research Center, Alpha Lambda Delta- Oregon State University Chapter Records, 1933-1999, Box 3, Folder 1.
Zook, George F. “How the Colleges Went to War.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 231 (1944): 1–7. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1023159.
Robbins, William. The People’s School: A History of Oregon State University. (Corvallis, Oregon: Oregon State University Press, 2017).
Witkowski, Terrence. “World War II Poster Campaigns: Preaching Frugality to American Consumers,” Journal of Advertising, 32 No.1, (2003), 69-82. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4622151
[ii] Graph showing the percentage of Alpha Lambda Delta members who graduated between the years 1933-1942, Oregon State College Chapter of Alpha Lambda Delta Scrapbook, 1933-1952, Oregon State University Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC) Alpha Lambda Delta- Oregon State University Chapter Records, 1933-1999 Box 3, Folder 1.
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Keaton Kahn.
Many of the Americans who served and died in the conflict of World War II are being forgotten; this tragic occurrence is nearly as devastating as their initial deaths. In the months and years following WWII, the War Department worked to provide universities with more information about the students and faculty who had died in the war by sending information about their deaths to their universities. The Department also worked to answer any questions families may have had about their lost loved ones. While the hundreds of thousands of brave Americans who died in World War II are all deserving of our remembrance, I will be focusing on William H. Bartlett Jr. and his legacy as it connects to Oregon State University.
With the outbreak of WWII in 1939, many American college students viewed the United States’ entry into the war as an inevitable outcome. College students had to consider a possible draft and decide whether they would try to defer their enlistment until after completing their degree so that they could enter the service as officers, or try to find a way out of the conflict completely. Many students dutifully finished college and filled the military’s needs by fitting into specialized roles such as doctors or engineers while others decided to enlist before they completed their degree.
A good example of one student who was too eager to wait for graduation is our soldier of focus, William H. Bartlett. Bartlett decided to enlist after only being in school for one year as an engineering major.[i] Like many of his fellow soldiers, Bartlett Jr.’s family had a proud tradition of patriotism and service to the U.S. Armed Forces. Bartlett’s father was a colonel in the army and served during WWII. He received the Silver Star Award in 1945 for his heroic actions in Thuringia, Germany; Bartlett Sr. had exposed himself to small arms fire to set up a forward observation post.[ii] This forward post allowed him to direct artillery fire which resulted in the assault force taking the city of Suhl with minimal casualties, a feat that would not have been possible without Bartlett Sr.’s heroic actions.[iii] Perhaps the elder Bartlett was battling grief as he did these heroic feats; he had learned of his son’s death only a few months earlier.[iv]
Tradition and heritage led many students like Bartlett Jr. to proudly enlist, allowing themselves to be fuel for the fires of the war machine. Unfortunately, this military fervor resulted in many OSC being killed before they could return home either to finish their degrees or use their expertise for something other than fighting. Such was the fate of our soldier of focus: Bartlett Jr. died fighting in the Battle of the Bulge in 1945, just months before his father, perhaps in his son’s name, risked his own life to save the lives of his soldiers.[v]
According to records held by the Special Collections and Research Center (SCARC) at Oregon State University, on February 12th, 1946 Bartlett Jr.’s father wrote to the president of Oregon State College informing him of his son’s service, telling the president that in letters he had written to his father and family, Bartlett Jr. expressed a “great regard for the glorious history made by his 95th Division.”[vi] Bartlett’s Division was a part of the Third Army, which earned numerous awards during the war. While Bartlett Jr.’s unit was conducting a night march in the Ardennes Forest during the Battle of the Bulge, he was killed as the Third Army was trying to secretly maneuver to a more opportunistic position.[vii] Private Bartlett was awarded the Purple Heart for his sacrifices during his service and was buried in Holland, along with 17,000 other Americans who, as Colonel Bartlett explained to OSC President Strand, “gave their lives to ensure the Great American Victory of the Battle of the Bulge.”[viii]
Colleges around the nation found their campuses drastically different than they had been in the past. With over ten million young men being sent to the war effort, females made up the majority of students on most campuses. The military had drafted a significant number of male students, and the only men remaining on campus tended to be those who obtained a deferment or were undergoing military training through the school. The lack of male students left a void in college attendance that was filled by those training for military service. Many colleges contributed to the war effort by allowing the military to conduct training on their campuses and holding events to help the war effort. Even before most men left campuses, many colleges incorporated mandatory exercise and drill training for men, as they were expected at some point to enter military service.[ix] College curriculums were streamlined, and free time, like summer break, became a thing of the past. Males in college were there only to learn their job and go serve the needs of the nation or the war effort.[x]
Oregon State University has a long and proud history of military training and excellence. Since 1872, the U.S. Military has had a relationship with what was then called Corvallis College, and students have been involved with various practices and programs since its partnership, such as the ROTC program and numerous military tournaments and drilling competitions throughout the life of this partnership.[xi] During the Spanish War of 1898, the college trained many soldiers and officers to fight: the start of a proud tradition of students at what is now Oregon State University serving their country through military service.[xii] The college became so proficient at supplying trained individuals to the service that in 1917 the War Department acknowledged it as a “distinguished” institution.[xiii] From 1911 into at least the 1930s the military regularly held tournaments at Oregon State, giving students the opportunity to participate in events that showcased their military training and even win cash prizes.[xiv] This extreme dedication to supplying trained individuals to the military earned the college the nickname “The West Point of the West.”[xv] During WWII, the institution was instrumental in training cadets for military service. The institution hosted and trained 4812 cadets (Junior officers) who were on campus through the Army Specialization training program—more than any other non-military institution.[xvi] And many students such as William Bartlet Jr. voluntarily enlisted, along with students who enter the service today and are continuing this tradition of dedication and proud sacrifice.[xvii] The ROTC continues to recruit and send students into the military: well-trained and ready to represent the proud legacy of service at Oregon State University.
Third Detachment at “Retreat” outside Strand Hall, which would have been built just three years previous (May 9, 1916).[xviii]
This photo is from a pamphlet on military history at OSC, published by the Agricultural College on Dec 9, 1921.[xix] It displays the Corps of Cadets training at OSC. At that time, one of the uniforms they were wearing would have cost $16.[xx]
This photo is from a pamphlet (May 29, 1926) announcing an upcoming military tournament at OSC, shows a Pony Express Race, an event in which four teams of three from each cavalry unit compete. This event plays out a lot like a baton pass relay race, where they have a mailbag that they pass to the next person and so on; the first team to get the mailbag across the finish line wins.[xxi]
Next Memorial Day, if you have no one else to remember, remember them: the brave Americans who died fighting in a distant land.
[i] “BARTLETT, William H Jr.,” Fields of Honor Database, accessed May 25, 2023. https://www.fieldsofhonor-database.com/index.php/en/american-war-cemetery-margraten-b/50175-bartlett-william-h-jr. Letter from Colonel William H. Bartlett to OSC president A.L. Strand, February 12, 1946, Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC) Oregon State College History of World War II Project Records (MSS ODCWW2), Box 1, Folder titled “Completed war service record forms 1940-1946 Agee-Kirk.”
[xi] “History of the Military Department,” Oregon State Agricultural College Pamphlet, 7, stamped December 9, 1921, SCARC Memorabilia Collection, Box 106, Folder 17.
[xiv] “Military Tournament of the Corps of Cadets O.A.C.,” 5, May 29, 1923, and “Military Tournament” January 21, 1911, SCARC: Memorabilia Collection, Box 106, Folder 17.
[xvii] Luther Cressman, “War Service Record – World War II – Oregon State College,” February 12, 1946, SCARC, History of World War 2 project, (MSS ODCWW2). Box 1, folder 1.
[xviii] Pamphlet titled “Oregon Agricultural College, Education for Enlisted Men,” December 15, 1918, SCARC Memorabilia Collection, Box 106, folder 17.
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Garrett Workinger.
Although battles and military victories may dominate histories of WWII, it was—at its core—a war of resources. As the United States scrambled to react to its involvement in the global crisis of WWII, many economic and cultural changes came about in the name of winning the war effort. The war effort on the domestic front created a national culture of conserving, creating, and rationing valuable resources such as food and raw materials. Communities, counties, cities, and universities across the nation became deeply involved in the domestic war front. Oregon State University (then Oregon State College) took quick action to help relieve the demand for resources that the nation felt. OSC and its extension program aided the war effort by promoting student and state involvement in Victory Gardens, food self-sufficiency, and raw material collection.
While looking through wartime documents preserved in Oregon State University’s Special Collections and Archives Center, I stumbled upon an Oregon State Extension Bulletin article located within a pamphlet subtitled “A Wartime Emergency Handbook for Community and Neighborhood Leaders.” Printed in 1943, the pamphlet was created to teach Oregon residents about how to handle food resources at home. At the top of the front page it states, in large letters “Victory Begins at Home.”[i] OSU Extension Service created this document to inform the local community about what they should grow in their own gardens so that rations could be reserved for the war effort. The article emphasizes Oregonians’ need to be self-sufficient at home in order to save commercially packaged goods for the troops overseas. This publication informed readers about a variety of topics, including how much to ration and what food to grow or store. For example, the bulletin stated that a family of five needed to store 1200 pounds of vegetables and 25o pounds of fruit for the year 1943. Other bulletins went into detail about how to grow a Victory Garden, or even how to can and preserve the produce that had been grown.
OSC Extension Bulletin 615 is 6 pages long; this is the first page. Federal Cooperative Extension Service, Oregon State College, 1943, “Victory Garden and Family Food Supply,” Corvallis, Or. Federal Cooperative Extension Service.
This OSC Extension Bulletin is part of a larger collection of bulletins that OSC Extension Services—still an important component of Oregon State University—has issued throughout its long existence. The OSC extension program was created in 1914 by the Smith-Lever Act which provided federal funding to land grant universities in order to further research in agriculture, home economics, and governmental policy.[ii] During WWII the OSC Extension Service printed these informational bulletins regularly. They contained information that the general public could use to expand their knowledge about agricultural topics and updated Oregonians about the country’s food and resource needs.
The Extension Service’s wartime bulletins provide a window into OSC’s involvement in the Victory Garden Program. The Victory Garden Program was a national movement created by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Its goal was to increase the production of healthy food for the civilian population, as well as allow the troops to use the majority of commercially packaged food. Community gardens were often encouraged to people in cities who did not ample space to grow a productive garden. People in rural areas, or people who had farms, were urged to start their own Victory Garden on their own property. Victory Gardens could also take the form of a school garden.
The Victory Garden program was popular all over Oregon. “Man working in a Victory Garden, Klamath County Oregon, 1942,” OSU Special Collections & Archives Research Center, https://oregondigital.org/concern/images/df70cz48w
OSC used the Extension Program to encourage Oregonians living in cities and rural communities to plant their own Victory Gardens. The Victory Garden Program at Oregon State College was part of the larger victory movement at Oregon State that included a number of different Victory Programs. Oregon State was involved in 267 different wartime Victory Programs that were created to help the war effort. Aside from increased food production through the Victory Gardens, these programs focused on collecting raw materials needed for wartime production such as rubber and metal, increasing agricultural productivity, and researching the nutrition people needed.[iii] For example, the OSU Extension Service provided charts for families that laid out exactly the amount of food they would need in a year so families could preserve, can or freeze, the estimated amount they would use in a year.[iv]
The Victory Gardens and nutritional information were a significant part of Oregon State College’s agricultural Extension Service. The 1941-1942 Biennial Report of Oregon State College outlined five “broad fronts” that the OSC wartime extension programs were working on. The third “front” was the need to teach nutrition and home management to rural and farm homes.[v] The OSC Extension Service acted on this front by publishing curriculum such as a Food for Victory program for Marion County Schools. The curriculum’s objective was to provide children with an understanding of the contributions Oregon farmers were making toward the war through food production. The program provided teachers with songs, class activities, and stories they could use in the classroom.[vi] Curriculum and influence on rural homes apparently worked. By 1943, 90 percent of Oregon farms were cultivating Victory Gardens.[vii]
Victory Gardens were part of a national Victory Program movement. The National War Food Administration, along with the United States Department of Agriculture, initiated the Victory Garden Program. The Victory Gardens were a large part of the government’s WWII propaganda posters.[viii] These posters were distributed nationally with the hopes of bringing attention and support to different war efforts. Even the Science News-Letter, a national publication, provided readers with important Victory Garden information in 1943. The letter outlined the importance of joining a community Victory Garden, or if you had ample space, starting a Victory Garden at home. Also, the letter stated that gardens should allow plenty of space for the “most important soldiers in the Victory Vegetable army”—tomatoes.[ix]
Nationally, just as in Oregon, there was a sense of urgency in educating the youth about home gardening, self-sufficiency, and rationing. Schools from all over the nation participated in the Victory Garden Program by creating community gardens. For example, in early 1942, soon after America’s entry into war, teachers from Highland Park Schools in Michigan, aided by the Michigan Recreation Department, started a Victory Garden program for school students throughout the state. The program started because the teachers believed that home gardens were not enough to meet the needs of the war, and community gardens were needed in Highland Park. Over 100 students had an opportunity to work on their own gardens that were 4ft by 24 ft.[x] The production of food, and education of the youth in self-sufficiency skills, were a priority all over the U.S.
While Extension Services played a lead role in championing Victory Gardens at OSC and throughout Oregon, faculty and students throughout the college contributed to these Victory Programs. Victory Programs were any program that was organized to aid in the collection of resources or materials for the war effort. The Oregon State Barometer encouraged female students to donate their rubber and metal beauty items because “any little thing you give will help to win the war.”[xi] The need for metal was so extensive during the war effort that shop owners closed down their businesses to help with a scrap metal drive. OSC class presidents requested all of the men’s living group presidents to bring five men each to the drive that occurred in October of 1942 in Corvallis. The students were challenged by Dave Buam, an organizer of the scrap drive, and chairman of the Oregon Defense Council, to try to load more scrap metal than the working-class men who were also helping with the scrap metal drive.[xii]
Students and staff took great pride in their contributions to these programs. For example, Dorothy Gerling noted in the 1943-1944 Coed Code how all activities on campus were “directed toward the Victory Program.”[xiii] The Coed Code was an annual OSC women’s publication. OSC faculty member Dean Salser likewise told the 1944 Beaver, the college yearbook, that he had no time for other hobbies because “teaching and his victory garden have occupied most of his time.”[xiv]
Scrap metal drives were a common way to get many people from the community involved in the war effort. “Scrap metal collection day in Corvallis, Oregon,” 1942. OSU Special Collections & Archives Research Center, https://oregondigital.org/concern/images/df70ct058
Oregon State College’s efforts on the home front during WWII were extensive and successful. The Victory Gardens and other war effort programs that the OSC Extension Service organized helped create a culture of production, self-sufficiency, and with the local community. OSC was a small part of the national war effort movement, but its programs embodied the goals and culture of the domestic front that aided the Allies in winning the war.
[i] “Victory Garden and Family Food Supply” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State Systems of Higher Education, 1943), Extension Bulletin 615.
[iv] Mabel C. Mack, “Planning Your Families Food Supply” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State Systems of Higher Education, 1944), Extension Bulletin 588.
[vi] OSC Extension Ag. Economics, April 1943, “Food for Victory: A unit of Work for the Schools of Marion County, Oregon,” OSU Special Collections and Archives Research Center, Extension Service Records 1903-2011, RG 111, SG 2, X, Projects, Extension Specialists.
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Erin Phillips.
In the American narrative of World War Two, there are a few common story beats that persevere today. Japan and Germany dragged the United States into the war kicking and screaming. The United States assumed her position among the allies, harnessing her industrial might and manpower to defeat evil fascist regimes, liberate Europe and Asia, and secure democracy. According to this popular retelling, American citizens could be proud of this good and just war, fought for morally correct reasons.
While this narrative holds some truth, it does not tell the whole story. In their desire to defeat the Empire of Japan, American leaders sacrificed the values of freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for their citizens, especially American citizens of Japanese descent. The American government’s internment and illegal incarceration of Japanese-Americans impacted the lives of approximately 110,000 Japanese-Americans, including the students and alumni of Oregon State College (later Oregon State University). The specter of discrimination, racism, and doubts about their loyalty as United States citizens loomed large over the lives of these citizens. And their stories and experiences fill in the gaps of the typical American narrative, providing us a more comprehensive accounting of the US and Oregon State University during World War Two.
Firstly, it’s important to know who these citizens were. In 1941, Japanese-Americans were most commonly the children of immigrants or immigrants themselves. First-generation immigrants, those born in Japan, were referred to as Issei. The term Nisei applied to second-generation immigrants, those born in the United States to Issei parents. Nisei made up the majority of the Japanese-American population in 1941.[i] Japan’s attack on the US on December 7, 1941 raised questions about the loyalty of Issei and Nisei.
What does one do when their loyalty is in question? The document to the right is a letter that thirty-six Japanese-American students and alumni at Oregon State College sent to interim OSC President F. A. Gilfillan, on Thursday, December 11, 1941, four days after Japan’s December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Their signatures are visible below the body of the letter, a reminder that each one of these signatures belongs to a person—a student or alumni of Oregon State College. The Special Collections and Research Center (SCARC) has preserved this typed and signed letter within the records of the OSU’s President’s Office. Additionally, the Oregon Multicultural Archives (OMA) blog has provided a transcript of the letter and its signatories.[ii]
The letter explores the potential ramifications of Japan’s attack on the psyche and safety of Japanese-American students at OSC. The authors argued that Japanese-American students should not be treated differently because of Japan’s actions. They also stressed their “unswerving loyalty to our country, the United States of America, and to all her institutions.” The students and alumni explained how they have found peace of mind, friendships, and educational inspiration at Oregon State even as they stressed their readiness to prove their mettle as American citizens in the war.
Historian William Robbins observes that World War Two “rent asunder normal routines on the Oregon State College campus.”[iii] This reality was one Japanese-American students at Oregon State College found themselves in following Japan’s attack. During the 1941-42 academic year, 36 Japanese-American students and alumni called OSC their academic home. The office of the registrar has preserved the names and class standings of these thirty-six students through a list compiled for winter term of 1942.[iv] While that number might seem small, more students with Japanese ancestry were enrolled at OSC at the time than at the University of Oregon and thus, OSC had the largest population of Japanese-American students in Oregon.
The outbreak of war between Japan, the country of their ancestors, and the United States, the country of their birth, deeply impacted these Japanese-American students. Political Science instructor and Associate Dean of Men Dan W. Poling recalled in later years that during a morning lecture he delivered on December 8, 1941, two Japanese-American students, “had their heads down and they never looked up. I know they were very distraught.”[v] A Tuesday, December 9, 1941, editorial in the Oregon State Barometer similarly contemplated these students’ experiences. Titled “The Unfortunate,” the author speculated about the impact these global events might have on Japanese-Americans, specifically, OSC students.[vi] The author argued that neither the university nor the student body should treat these Japanese-American students differently because of Japan’s actions. The author reminded readers that these students were American; the three-paragraph editorial referenced their American citizenship four separate times.
The writing of the loyalty letter to interim OSC President F.A. Gilfillan had a profound effect on OSC faculty and staff. They immediately realized how the war had shattered the normal lives of their Japanese-American students, and felt moved to console them and respond. Glenn A. Bakkum of the Department of Sociology sent a letter to interim OSC President Gilfillan on December 14, 1941, in response to the loyalty letter that Gilfillan received three days prior. Bakkum urged Gilfillan to respond to the individuals who had signed the loyalty letter and thereby alleviate and calm their fears.[vii] Although it is unclear whether he was responding to Bakkum’s suggestion, Gilfillan did formulate a response. On December 18, 1941, his office sent a letter to each signatory.
In the letter, pictured above, Gilfillan empathized with Japanese-American students’ plight and contrasted it with the difficult situations Americans had faced before. Gilfillan noted that the college was honored by these students’ and alumni’s declaration of loyalty to the United States of America and Oregon State College.[viii]
These sentiments of loyalty, sympathy, and appreciation for the Japanese-American students at Oregon State College in the opening months of the war reflect a stark reality. While the outbreak of war indeed rent asunder the normalcy of life at OSC, the opinions and thoughts the student body and faculty expressed about the extreme hardship their Japanese-American peers faced demonstrates something remarkable. While Japanese-Americans across the nation encountered racism and harassment, the students and faculty at Oregon State viewed these students as friends and colleagues, not as enemies.
On February 19, 1942, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066. This order authorized the secretary of war and military commanders “to prescribe military areas… from which any and all persons may be excluded.”[ix] While the order did not specifically name Japanese-Americans as the persons to be excluded, it was clear from the choice to not incarcerate Italian or German-Americans that this order would be exclusively targeting Japanese-Americans. The key proponents of this executive order and the mass incarceration were Western Defense Commander General John L. DeWitt and Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy. As a result, approximately 110,000 Japanese-Americans living on the west coast were eventually removed and placed in internment camps further east.[x] On March 2, 1942, DeWitt issued Public Proclamation No. 1, designating the west coast into military areas and excluding all persons of Japanese ancestry from these areas.[xi] The Western Defense Command (WDC) and the Wartime Civil Control Administration (WCCA) controlled and organized the implementation and evacuation of Japanese-Americans from designated military areas. By June 6, 1942, all Japanese-Americans had been forcibly removed from Military Area No. 1—which included Oregon, to assembly sites, such as the Portland Assembly Center.[xii]
Some university presidents pushed back against these orders and restrictions. For example, University of California President Robert Sproul spoke for many university presidents when he argued that these students should be allowed to continue their education despite the imminent internment order.[xiii] Interim OSC president Gilfillan similarly questioned the new restrictions, sending an inquiry to General DeWitt, on the subject of Japanese American students.[xiv] Gilfillan asked whether Japanese-American students would be allowed to study in the library past the 8:00pm curfew that the military had imposed on Japanese-American citizens, a request General DeWitt promptly denied.[xv]
The experiences of OSC students were similar to those of university students across the country, all of whom confronted wartime measures that restricted their freedom. Executive Order 9066 permitted the US government, the Western Defense Command, and the Wartime Civil Control Administration to remove “all citizens of Japanese ancestry from the Pacific Coastal Region.”[xvi] The Oregon State Barometer published an article on May 26, 1942 that explained that all Japanese-Americans would be evacuated. The article, titled “Japanese are ordered form 11 counties,” explored the effects of Civilian Exclusion Orders No. 87 and No.91. These required all citizens of Japanese-descent to report to civil control stations for eventual relocation.[xvii] The closest assembly center was the Portland Assembly center, located on the site of Pacific International Livestock Exposition Pavilion.[xviii] The lives of not just OSC’s student population, but also Japanese-Americans across the nation, changed irreversibly in the coming months.
Individual stories help us to better understand the impact these orders had on Japanese-American citizens. One young woman who signed the loyalty letter was recent OSC graduate Molly (Kageyama) Maeda—the only alumnus to do so. Molly (Mariko) Kageyama was born on November 23, 1919, in Dee, Oregon to Yasuta and Ichino Kageyama. She was the second child of the Kageyama family; she had two sisters and one brother.[xix] All pictures in the following section have been graciously provided by the Milton and Molly (Kageyama) Maeda Collection through Densho, a digital archive that records and preserves the stories of Japanese-Americans during WWII. Molly and her siblings were Nisei, meaning the second-generation Japanese-Americans born in the United States to Issei parents.
In 1937, Molly graduated from Hood River High School and began attending Oregon State College. One reason she chose OSC, she later explained, was because the university had given her a scholarship. Another reason was that her sister, who had also received a scholarship, was already enrolled there as a student.[xx] During a 2014 interview, Molly recounted in her own words, with a smile, that she “liked it (Oregon State) real well. I studied hard…”[xxi] During her college years, Molly made connections with the small community of Japanese-American students, connections that can be seen in the photo below.
Dated 1939, this photograph shows Molly, Lena, and presumably their fellow friend and student Emi, outside of what is now known as Furman Hall on the OSC campus.[xxii] Molly eventually met another Japanese-American student at OSC by the name of Milton Maeda. Molly and Milton were engaged by early 1942 and married later that year.
Molly graduated in June 1941 with Phi Kappa Phi honors. Following graduation, she later worked in the OSC registrar’s office. Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 cut short her employment.[xxiii] Molly left OSC a few months after the attack, during a moment of uncertainty for Japanese-Americans. She returned home to Hood River to be closer to her parents and siblings. Molly and her fiancé, Milton Maeda, traveled to the Portland Assembly Center on May 12, 1942, in accordance with the restrictions placed on Japanese-Americans by Western Defense Command. Milton and Molly married on May 19, 1942, at the Portland Assembly Center, the first such marriage performed inside a detention center for Japanese-Americans.[xxiv] Below is the wedding photo of Milton and Molly Maeda, taken on May 14th days before the proper wedding ceremony.[xxv]
In September 1942, officials within the Western Defense Command (WDC) and the Wartime Civil Control Administration (WCCA), transferred Milton and Molly Maeda from the Portland Assembly Center to the Minidoka Internment Camp in southern Idaho.[xxvi] Milton and Molly remained there for approximately 13 months before obtaining permission from the War Relocation Authority (WRA) to relocate to Milwaukee, WI.
It is hard to quantify how much Molly’s life changed during the first two years of the war, as did the lives of approximately 110,000 Japanese-American citizens. Molly’s life was uprooted by war and the internment of Japanese-Americans. Instead of having a wedding and honeymoon and continuing her employment at OSC, she was forced to relocate to an internment camp and endure numerous hardships. The wartime restrictions and disruptions that Japanese-Americans including Molly Maeda, went through, contrasts sharply with the lives they lived prior to WWII.
After eighty years, the experiences of Japanese-American citizens during World War Two are as relevant as ever in the American story. For many years, the general public neglected the experiences of these citizens, and in some cases outright denied their truths. Even when historians or the public examine the narrative of America’s role in World War Two, the experiences of Japanese-Americans are relegated to a footnote. It is easy to forget and distance ourselves from these events. However, we must strive to always remember that each one of the approximately 110,000 Japanese-Americans were as human as you and me. They were mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, students, and teachers. The people incarcerated in this racist effort were American citizens, as the decision to not incarcerate German or Italian-Americans implies prejudice rooted in racism guided American decision-makers.
The moment citizens feel the need to prove their innocence and loyalty–as these OSC students had–just in order to not be viewed as the enemy, we need to reflect on our own biases and how modern society perpetuates them. In a time when we are still dealing with the consequences of systematic and perpetual racism, the burden falls on us to reject racism and prejudice, and to never forget the victims of this injustice.
[i] Valerie Matsumoto, “Japanese American Women during World War II,” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 8, no.1 (1984): 6, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3346082
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Caitlin Patton.
In November 1942, the Oregon State Barometer published an article titled “Home Ec Schools Under Pressure,” which provides insight into the dietician and nutrition programs in Oregon State College’s (OSC) School of Home Economics.[i] Further research reveals that other departments beyond Home Economics developed programs to reach the broader Corvallis and Oregon communities. These programs reflect an increase in support from doctors and the general public for nutrition research and its practical applications during the beginning of World War II. The American government worked with universities across the country, including OSC, to develop and manage numerous programs to share information on and provide support for the nutrition of both civilians and soldiers.
“Home Ec Schools Under Pressure,” Oregon State Barometer, November 20, 1942, p 1.
This November 1942 article in the Oregon State Barometer, OSC’s student-run newspaper, reported the U.S. Army had requested “1200 additional trained dieticians” and that Dean Ava B. Milam, “who heads the [home economics] school on this campus and who is the chairman of the state committee on nutrition for defense,” shared this information at a recent Faculty Triad club luncheon. The article also described new collaborative programs between the military and the school to certify graduates as dieticians faster using apprenticeship programs. It also explained that Dean Milam hoped to apply the apprenticeship model to other subjects.[ii] This article shows how the army was attempting to recruit dieticians, but it does not explain if the army was asking for recruits directly from the home economics school at OSC or from colleges in general.[iii] Additionally, some quotes from Dean Milam imply that the increased recruitment of dieticians was the result of a shift in public opinion towards concern about diet for civilian workers as well as soldiers.[iv] This article raises many questions about the forces and factors which influenced the development of the dietician program at Oregon State College.
Primary sources demonstrate the collaborative efforts of the dieticians and nutritionists within OSC’s Home Economics Department and the American government during World War II to improve the nutrition of both soldiers and civilians. Wartime articles sharing the experiences of recent OSC graduates showcased the work these dieticians were doing to help soldiers. For example, two articles from the Barometer, both printed in 1944, list several OSC graduates from the home economics department who were working as dieticians for the army.[v] Additionally, the Oregon State Yank, a magazine for OSC alumni serving in the armed forces, published articles that recounted the experiences of graduates serving as dieticians in various military theaters. One of these articles, titled “SHE-I Observations,” named various alumni working as dieticians at Fort Lewis and McChord Field, both in Washington. One OSC-trained dietician was even working with troops stationed in England.[vi] Another article titled “The Feminine Front” introduced readers to Roberta “Becky” Beer, a recent alum who had “answered the urgent call for dieticians.”[vii]
Home Economics also worked with government organizations to change the nutrition habits of civilians. In 1943, Dean Milam served as chairman of the Oregon Nutrition Committee for Defense. In this position, she took an active role in organizing numerous policies and programs meant to provide nutritional information and support to American families.[viii] As the Dean of the Home Economics School, Milam may have also been responsible for adding the class “Nutrition for National Defense” in the 1942-1943 class catalog.[ix] A survey of prior catalogs reveals this was a new class. Although details about course content are unavailable, it’s likely that Milam and others hoped that this new course would communicate useful information to women who might one day serve in the army or whose work might support their local communities.[x] Mabel C. Mack, an OSC graduate from the School of Home Economics also published several pamphlets with the Oregon State College Extension Service on food supply, nutrition, and management during wartime for families.[xi] Mack had completed a PhD at OSC in 1939 and may have served on Milam’s Oregon Nutrition Committee for Defense.[xii] These documents show how the women of the School of Home Economics contributed to the national conversation about the nutritional well-being of soldiers and civilian families.
The first page of Mabel C. Mack’s “Food to Keep You Fit,” adorned with patriotic decorations, provides information about the author and publisher. The second page of “Food to Keep You Fit” lists daily amounts for different food categories and pictures of those categories. The third page of “Food to Keep You Fit” provides readers with a recommended pattern of food categories for breakfast, dinner, and supper or lunch. The fourth and final page of “Food to Keep You Fit, lists weekly amounts of different food categories as well as an image of a red shield with the text “Defend Your Health With Protective Foods.” Available in Special Collections & Archives Research Center, hereafter referred to as SCARC, Oregon State University Libraries, Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1941), Extension Bulletin 562.
OSC’s School of Agriculture and Extension Services also played a key role in wartime food and nutrition programs. Perhaps taking a page from the School of Home Economics, faculty authored pamphlets focused on food management during the war. For example, in 1943 A. G. B. Bouquet, Professor of Vegetable Crops, printed a pamphlet on growing a vegetable garden.[xiii] The next year, Thomas Onsdorff, an Associate Professor of Food Industries, and Lucy A. Case, a nutritionist from Extension Services, together published a guide on canning vegetables, fruits, meats, fish, and more. It also listed other resources published by OSC and the U.S. Department of Agriculture that families could easily request from their County Extension Office or OSC’s Home Economics Extension Service if they wanted more information.[xiv]
OSC and Extension Services also supported the Victory Garden Program. W. A. Schoenfeld, Dean and Director of Agriculture, presided over a conference, held in the Memorial Building on December 4th, 1942, for representatives of local branches of the Victory Garden Program in Oregon. Some of the featured guests included economists and horticulturists from Extension Services as well as state officials.[xv] And in an effort to share their expertise with the community, OSC faculty reached out to local schools. Professor Bouquet (noted above) developed a popular victory garden class for high school students.[xvi] The class included a lecture that guided students on which crops would be best to grow for canning and on how to maximize the amount of produce grown in their gardens.[xvii]
The various nutrition programs that OSC faculty developed and managed reflect a broader effort during WWII to improve nutrition for both soldiers and civilians. As the army began to draft soldiers, it also conducted surveys on the health of recruits and found that 25% of conscripts displayed symptoms of prior or recent malnutrition.[xviii] In 1940, President Roosevelt called for a National Nutrition Conference for Defense on the grounds that “Fighting men of our armed forces, workers in industry, the families of these workers, every man and woman in America, must have nourishing food. If people are undernourished they cannot be efficient in producing what we need in our unified drive for dynamic strength.”[xix] The first Nutrition Conference for Defense, held in 1941, stressed the importance of addressing national nutrition through programs across different levels of government, from the national down to the local.[xx] Although the Victory Garden Program was managed at the local level, it had a great national impact: families across the country locally grew 8 million total tons of food in a single year.[xxi] The national and state governments also developed programs such as free school lunches and food stamps to support struggling families.[xxii] The U.S. Congress passed the Tydings Amendment in 1942, which granted farm workers an exemption from the draft so that they could continue to produce necessary foods throughout the war.[xxiii] The U.S. Army, meanwhile, designed the dietician apprenticeship program mentioned in the 1942 Barometer article to secure nutrition support for both military and civilian hospitals.[xxiv] University students who completed an approved course could apply to serve as an apprentice at a military or civilian hospital for six months before serving another six months at another U.S. Army hospital. The army also developed another program to recruit dieticians from unrelated undergraduate programs.[xxv] These national nutrition programs benefited both civilians and the military greatly.
Student dieticians filling out forms for food requisition and special diets orders. Available in Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 114, no. 10 (September 22, 2014): 1648–62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.08.001. Photo courtesy of The Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives of The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions.
The November 1942 Barometer article “Home Ec Schools Under Pressure” reveals the important role that Oregon State College faculty and alumni played in wartime efforts to promote nutrition across the United States and in the military. The graduates of the home economics school worked with soldiers as dieticians and shared resources with civilian families. The other departments of OSC also reached out to the Oregon community with guides and education programs. The nutrition programs of Oregon State College, from the dietician apprenticeship program to the Victory Gardens Program, contributed to the national efforts to improve the nutrition of Americans at home and soldiers abroad.
Notes:
[i] “Home Ec Schools Under Pressure,” Oregon State Barometer, November 20, 1942: 1.
[ix] “Foods and Nutrition,” in Oregon State College CATALOG 1941-42 (Eugene: Oregon State Board of Higher Education, 1941), 342-345.
[x] “Foods and Nutrition,” in Oregon State College CATALOG 1942-43 (Eugene: Oregon State Board of Higher Education, 1942), 343.
[xi] Mabel C. Mack, “FOOD To Keep You Fit,” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1941), Extension Bulletin 562; Mabel C. Mack, “Use Milk, Eggs, and Milk Products,” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1941), Extension Bulletin 583; Mabel C. Mack, “Planning YOUR FAMILY”S FOOD SUPPLY,” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1942), Extension Bulletin 588; Mabel C. Mack, “Planning YOUR FAMILY”S FOOD SUPPLY,” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1943), Extension Bulletin 616.
[xii] Mabel Clair Townes Mack, “A Study of the Kitchen Sink Center In Relation to Home Management,” (PhD diss., Oregon State College, 1939), 1; “Minutes of Meeting,” 1.
[xiii] A. G. B. Bouquet, “Farm and Home VEGETABLE GARDEN,” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1943), Extension Bulletin 614.
[xiv] Lucy A. Case and Thomas Onsdorff, “Home Food Preservation by Canning * Salting,” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650 (Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1944), Extension Bulletin 642.
[xv] “Victory Garden Heads To Convene at OSC,” Oregon State Barometer, November 25, 1942: 1, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71nj11d.
[xvi] “Oregonian Features Bouquet in Editorials,” Oregon State Barometer, March 3, 1943: 1, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71nj59k.
[xvii] “Victory Gardeners Hear Crop Lecture,” Oregon State Barometer, March 2, 1943: 2, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71nj589.
[xviii] Karen Stein, “History Snapshot: Dietetics Student Experience in the 1940s,” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 114, no. 10 (September 22, 2014): 1648–62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.08.001, 1652.
[xix] “The National Nutrition Conference,” Public Health Reports (1896-1970) 56, no. 24 (1941): 1234, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4583763.
[xx] “The National Nutrition Conference,” 1248-1249.
[xxi] H. W. Hochbaum, “Victory Gardens in 1944: How Teachers May Help,” The American Biology Teacher 6, no. 5 (1944): 101–3. https://doi.org/10.2307/4437480, 101.
[xxii] “The National Nutrition Conference,” 1248-1249; “Minutes of Meeting,” 1.
[xxiii] Lizzie Collingham, The Taste of War (New York, NY: Penguin Group USA, 2012), 75–88, 78-79.
“Armed Services Claim Co-eds.” Oregon State Barometer, May 19, 1944: 3. https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71nk56z.
Bouquet A. G. B. “Farm and Home VEGETABLE GARDEN.” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, Extension Bulletin 614. Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1943.
Case, Lucy A. and Thomas Onsdorff. “Home Food Preservation by Canning * Salting.” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, Extension Bulletin 642. Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1944.
Collingham, Lizzie. The Taste of War, 75–88. New York, NY: Penguin Group USA, 2012.
“Foods and Nutrition.” In Oregon State College CATALOG 1941-42, 342-345. Eugene: Oregon State Board of Higher Education, 1941.
“Foods and Nutrition.” In Oregon State College CATALOG 1942-43, 343-345. Eugene: Oregon State Board of Higher Education, 1942.
Hochbaum, H. W., “Victory Gardens in 1944: How Teachers May Help.” The American Biology Teacher 6, no. 5 (1944): 101–3. https://doi.org/10.2307/4437480.
“Home Ec Schools Under Pressure.” Oregon State Barometer. November 20, 1942: 1.
Latvala, Jayne Walters. “THE FEMININE FRONT.” Oregon State Yank, November 1944: 14. https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719t25j.
Mack, Mabel C. “FOOD To Keep You Fit.” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, Extension Bulletin 562. Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1941.
Mack, Mabel C. “Use Milk, Eggs, and Milk Products.” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, Extension Bulletin 583. Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1941.
Mack, Mabel C. “Planning YOUR FAMILY’S FOOD SUPPLY.” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, Extension Bulletin 588. Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1942.
Mack, Mabel C. “Planning YOUR FAMILY’S FOOD SUPPLY.” in Oregon State College Extension Service Bulletin 551-650, Extension Bulletin 616. Corvallis: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1943.
Mack, Mabel Clair Townes. “A Study of the Kitchen Sink Center In Relation to Home Management.” PhD diss., Oregon State College, 1939.
“Oregonian Features Bouquet in Editorials.” Oregon State Barometer, March 3, 1943, 1. https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71nj59k.
Peterson, Anne, “Dietitians Seek Military Status In Army Service.” The New York Times, October 13, 1940. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1940/10/13/94840663.html?pageNumber=60.
“SHE-I Observations.” Oregon State Yank, November 1944: 14. https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719t25j.
Stein, Karen.“History Snapshot: Dietetics Student Experience in the 1940s.” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 114, no. 10 (September 22, 2014): 1648–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.08.001.
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Andrew Hare.
Oregon State University (OSU) today looks much different than it once did. Whereas now the university has a broad curriculum that includes the sciences, the liberal arts, engineering, and agriculture, there was a time, not long ago, when OSU did not, and federally could not, offer liberal arts curricula beyond basic services. When the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890 designated Oregon State University to be one of seventy-six land-grant institutions, it did so with the intention of offering instruction in science, military tactics, agriculture, and engineering.[i] Additionally, in 1932 the State Board of Higher Education in Oregon determined that OSU, then known as Oregon State College (OSC), should focus predominantly on professional and technical curricula.[ii] This directive corresponded with the Oregon State System of Higher Education’s conviction that OSC not duplicate the liberal arts education offered at the University of Oregon.[iii]
The system of higher education in Oregon, alongside the rational of Oregon State College as a land-grant institution, is what prevailed until 1973 when the College of Liberal Arts officially began offering majors and degrees, ending the marginal status of liberal arts. Oregon State University did so despite more than 100 years of vocational and technical education. Such a shift in higher educational curriculum evokes the question: at what point did liberal arts curricula begin to become important and develop at Oregon State University?
One answer is found, in part, during World War II, a moment when liberal arts curricula increased to provide professional and technical students with supplementary coursework.[iv] A close study of wartime curricular changes at OSC reveals that increasing awareness of America’s international responsibilities and opportunities underscored the importance of the liberal arts. Oregon State College was not alone in this shift; many universities across the country found themselves implementing new liberal arts curricula likewise to prepare their students, illustrating a more dynamic concern for international preparation.[v]
This narrative centers on two key elements of archival documents: the yearly course catalogs the Registrar of Oregon State College published between the years 1941-1945 and the yearly curriculum coordination meetings that the university President, executive body, and Deans held during the years 1941-1945. The university publishes these course catalogs every year, and they provide information on numerous topics, including faculty numbers, course descriptions, and student enrollment (Figures 1 & 2).
The curriculum coordination meetings, meanwhile, document various proposals to change curriculum—either by adding or removing courses (Figures 3 & 4 below). Once each Dean had proposed their changes, the President, executive body, and each Dean would vote on whether to advance that change. The story of the liberal arts at Oregon State College in WWII begins in the catalogs during the years of 1944 and 1945 with the addition of new language and cultural survey courses.[vi] Further examination of the curriculum coordination meeting reveals that OSC administrators believed that courses would support students pursuing professional and technical majors.
On December 29, 1942, during one of the administration curriculum coordination meetings, Oregon State College Dean Ulysses DuBach, speaking for the Lower Division & Service Departments (now College of Liberal Arts), proposed Russian language and Russian culture be added to the university’s course offerings to address the “present world conditions,” noting “Russia will be of increasing importance” (Figures 3 & 4).[vii]
Figure 3: Proposal for Russian culture survey & its reasoning by Dean DuBach. “New Courses,” 1942-1943, Curriculum Committees Minutes 1933-1965, SCARC, Microfilm RG 029, Reel-Folder 2.2.Figure 4: Proposal for Russian language courses & its reasoning by Dean DuBach. “New Courses,” 1942-1943, Curriculum Committees Minutes 1933-1965, SCARC, Microfilm RG 029, Reel-Folder 2.2.
Only two years later in 1944, Oregon State College officially began offering Russian cultural studies and first/second-year Russian language courses.[viii] To instruct these new wartime courses, OSC hired four new faculty whose sole responsibility was to teach these new courses, a decision made partly to address the decrease in faculty as a result of the war.[ix] In another instance, Home Economics Dean Ava Milam relayed a story of a serviceman learning Chinese who had found work using his language skills, expressing the need for Mandarin language courses.[x] Dean Milam cited this example to champion the additional languages and expanded cultural studies at OSC.[xi] Administrators understood the necessity of liberal arts as a means of not only complimenting their students’ scientific and professional education but also preparing them to work within an increasingly globalizing world.
These instances of language and cultural studies at OSC during World War II highlight a much deeper conversation OSC administrators had throughout the war. Concerned with how to ensure that the college’s liberal arts curriculum did not overlap with the University of Oregon, but wanting to continue its development, President Strand debated with colleagues about the benefit of introducing a liberal arts associate degree, asking “would it be a good thing for Oregon State College?”[xii] Only months before, on November 4, 1943, each Dean in their respective college unanimously agreed that language arts remained a critical necessity for the future of their students’ success in technical and professional fields.[xiii] Two years later in 1945, President Strand addressed the College in his biennial report stating and reiterated the necessity of liberal arts education and the development of its presence at Oregon State College for its students.[xiv]
Across the United States, higher education universities and colleges followed a similar path of utilizing liberal arts curricula to prepare their students for an increasingly globalized world economy.[xv] As John W. Studebaker, U.S. Commissioner of Education, noted on February 13, 1942: “Isolation is gone for good in the United States.”[xvi] Studebaker made these comments not about the war effort, but about curriculum, predicting that the war would encourage more instruction on “world geography, economics, and foreign languages.”[xvii] Many universities added cultural surveys and courses about international organizations, foreign languages, foreign literature, and geographical analysis.[xviii] Additionally, institutions began offering courses in Japanese, Russian, and Mandarin, reflecting the increased presence of each nation-state participating in the war at the time.[xix]
Overall, the changes made to Oregon State College’s liberal arts curricula throughout World War II coincided with a national imperative to provide students with opportunities to succeed in a post-isolationist United States, now amidst an international community. Yet, Oregon State College remained unique in that it made such changes while attempting to fit within the designation of its Morrill Act and Oregon State Board of Higher Education vocational and professional education outlines.
The development of the liberal arts curriculum at Oregon State College throughout World War II and beyond illustrates a much broader connection the higher education institutions have with the events and necessities of the world. The introduction of Russian as a language course is only part of a much larger expectation that universities had during and after the war to address the beginning of a much more global world. Although administrators at Oregon State College attempted to not duplicate courses offered at the University of Oregon, they recognized and addressed the necessity for students to have an expanded curriculum available to them, one that would enable them to advance their goals and responsibilities after graduation. Since then, the importance of both a scientific and liberal arts education has been a foundational asset to higher education institutions. It is interesting to wonder how the curriculum of today will change to be the curriculum of tomorrow.
[i] William Robbins, The People’s School (Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 2017), 1.
[iii]Biennial Report of Oregon State College1945–1946, 4-5, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 013, box 11, sub. 12.
[iv] “A Plan for Wartime,” April 26, 1942, item 60A-60F, Administrative Council Minutes 1941-1942to 1945-1946, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 032, Box-Folder 2.4.
[v] Caroline J. Conner and Chara H. Bohan, “The Second World War’s impact on the progressive educational movement: Assessing its role,” Journal of Social Studies Research 38, no. 2 (2014): 7, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2013.10.003.
[ix] “Minutes of the Administrative Council Meeting,” December 15, 1943, item 56 and “Minutes of the Administrative Council Meeting,” December 15, 1941, item 9. Both available in Administrative Council Minutes 1941-1942 to 1945-1946, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 032.
[x] “Minutes of the Administrative Council,” November 4, 1943, 53, Administrative Council Minutes 1941-1942 to 1945-1946, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 032, Box-Folder 2.4.
[xii] “Minutes of the Administrative Council” February 2, 1944, 121, Administrative Council Minutes 1944-1945, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 032, Box-Folder 2.3.
[xiii] “Minutes of the Administrative Council,” November 4, 1943, 53, Administrative Council Minutes 1941-1942 to 1945-1946, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 032, Box-Folder 2.4.
[xiv]Biennial Report of Oregon State College1945–1946, 1-2, SCARC, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, RG 013, box 11, sub. 12.
[xv] Virgus Ray Cardozier, Colleges and Universities in World War II (Westport: Praeger Press, 1997), 118-121.
During spring term Dr. Kara Ritzheimer’s History 310 (Historian’s Craft) students researched and wrote blog posts about OSU during WWII. The sources they consulted are listed at the end of each post. Students wrote on a variety of topics and we hope you appreciate their contributions as much as the staff at SCARC does!
This post was written by Aleksia Harris.
University students’ experiences during World War II were far from traditional for both young men and women. Male students trained for combat through the campus’s ROTC program, and female students continued their studies while filling in for their male peers. Oregon State University’s courses continued to enroll students in numerous areas of study such as engineering, agriculture, home economics, etc., motivating students, particularly female students, to continue a normal college education. The School of Home Economics at Oregon State University’s “General Statement” in the 1943-43 Oregon State College course catalog outlines the college’s purpose and goals for its primarily female student population.[i] While this field of study seems unbiased, program requirements reinforced gender norms that relegated women to motherhood and housekeeping which not only affected OSU students, but women across the nation.
Figure 1: “Student Home Ec. Mentors,” Oregon State Barometer. These five young women attended OSU in 1941 and are referred to as ‘Officers’ for the Home Economics program.
This “General Statement” included in Oregon State University’s course catalog enforces gender roles through language, encouraging women to continually carry the burden of providing a sense of normalcy through a perilous reality. The “General Statement” is directed at their female student population; it uses feminine pronouns, thereby suggesting that this major was primarily dedicated to producing the perfect housewife. This document is found in a bound book, written on paper with presumably a typewriter, and is a fraction of the complete catalog. It is also presented in a keen condition, a consequence of the archival storage it has enjoyed at the Oregon State University Valley Library. The school’s “General Statement” promises to prepare students for “all problems of the home and family,” hinting towards a gender bias when referring to the audience because women are expected to deal with familial issues during this time.
With the obvious gendering seen in the School of Home Economics “General Statement,” many of the degrees within the school focused on family-building classes that emphasized women’s role in the home. Classes such as, “Family Relationships” and “Child Care and Training” (347-348) presumed that many Home Economics majors were preparing for a future life as housewives. The Oregon State Barometer published an article in February 1941 titled “Active Home Management Girls Practice the Arts of Housekeeping” that touched on these gender roles. This article describes female Home Economics students’ daily tasks of making breakfast, laundry, housekeeping, hosting lunches, classes, and social events. While these actions are seen as an application of learned knowledge, housekeeping skills were considered a requirement for future housewives which is emphasized through OSU’s Household Administration curriculum.
There was obvious pressure on young women to continue their education and normal everyday life during the early years of the war. Doris P. Adamson attended OSU during the war and maintained a scrapbook that provides insight into the life of young women attending OSU during 1939-1941. This scrapbook contains handouts provided by OSU detailing ‘Co-Ed Codes’, and a ‘Save Your Blushes’ pamphlet, both of which describe the ideal female students at the school through proper manners and socialization.[ii]
Figure 2: “Housewife Special,” SCARC. Housewives in Salem eagerly assist in Oregon’s agricultural workload.
Other women, particularly housewives, in Oregon, were continuously assisting in agricultural fields due to the lack of male workers being sent to the war. The photograph titled, “Housewife Special,” found on the OSU Special Collections & Archives Research Center website, shows women boarding a bus, with tied-up hair and hats in hand ready to work in Marion County’s bean crop.[iii] While these women are pictured ready to work, they are still called ‘housewives’, reducing them to one simple characteristic of their identity. A 1940 Oregon State Barometer article titled; “Driving Bulk Truck on Wheat Ranch Proves Strange Occupation for a Girl” explains that Doris Crow tends to be the “only girl hauling around Pendleton” (3), making her a unique example of unusual female occupations. While many women participated in occupational or familial agriculture, gender norms during this time discounted women’s ability to enjoy “unfeminine” labor. This article is considerably newsworthy during the 1940s because young women were not imagined wanting to work in agricultural positions unless absolutely necessary.
Figure 3: Adel Manufacturing Corporation. “Mother, when will you stay home again?” This advertisement discusses the perks of working for ADEL Manufacturing Co. which comes in handy around the home, as well as in the workplace. This type of propaganda encouraged mothers to join the workforce, while also providing skill-building opportunities that can be used to fix appliances around the home.
Women across America each had unique experiences during the war yet were continuously categorized as either a housewife in training or a housewife regardless of the women’s social or economic status. The war provided numerous job opportunities for women of all ages and races, but these positions were temporary. Manufacturers hired women to keep up with the workload while men fought in the war, reminding them of their true calling in the home. Maureen Honey’s article, “The ‘Womanpower’ Campaign” notes that women were increasingly depicted as housewives rather than working women despite women’s increasing presence in the workforce, encouraged through magazine and poster ads.[iv] These housewives were eager to aid and assist their country during the war but were expected to keep up with child-rearing and housework. The idolization of home-making during this period seemingly stems from the morale-boosting comparison between housewives and frontline soldiers leading America to victory.[v] This propaganda tactic emphasizes the idea that women’s role during the war was to protect the home front through continuing childcare and housekeeping to provide normalcy for returning soldiers.[vi]
Further endorsing housewives to work, ADEL Manufacturing Corporation released this ad in the Saturday Evening Post in 1944 which presents a mother in factory overalls talking to her young daughter wearing similar clothing.[vii] The ad’s subtly sexist rhetoric implies that although women worked in key wartime industries, they desired to be housewives.[viii] The ad assured women that their time working would not be wasted on insignificant tasks, but on skills that they could later utilize around the home after the war when women would be able to return to their tasks of child care and housekeeping.vii This ad alludes to the idea that when needed, women will work but house-making is preferred, seemingly speaking for all American women.
American women in the workforce were not uncommon in the years leading up to World War II, but the numbers rose as more men were sent overseas. Marc Miller discusses the small town of Lowell, Massachusetts in his article, “Working Women and World War II,” pointing out the major push to get more women involved in the workforce, ultimately ignoring the working-class women of this area. But as the war progressed, new job opportunities for women opened up which provided a sense of occupational agency newly instilled in working women.[ix] Miller points out the “strong ideology prohibiting women from working” (60) similar or better jobs than men, which accounted for the number of women who willingly stepped down from their wartime jobs and returned to textile factories or tending to their household chores.
Oregon State University’s Home Economics program helped perpetuate gendered expectations stemming from national pressure to continue a sense of normalcy for returning soldiers. Social norms required women to utilize their feminine characteristics to find a sense of purpose which was typically child rearing and housekeeping while men provided financial support and physical protection. As young men were sent off to war, women were urged to join the workforce and assured that the nation appreciated their patriotic work, but they were also reminded through college courses and advertisements that women’s destined occupation was as a wife and mother. All the dedication and effort women gave to support their country during unpredictable times was only met with the constant reminder that women’s place is in the home even with a staggering number of female employees participating in the workforce before and during World War II.
Works Cited
Adel Manufacturing Corporation. “Mother, when will you stay home again?” May 1944, Saturday Evening Post. https://doi.org/10.2307/3346491.
“Active Home Management Girls Practice the Art of Housekeeping.” Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC), Oregon State University. Oregon StateBarometer, February 25, 1941″ Oregon Digital. Accessed 2023-06-07. https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71p570g.
Ava Milam, Frances Alexander. “Household Administration,” Oregon State College Course Catalog. Oregon State University SCARC. 1942-43. 347-349. Doris P. Adamson Scrapbook, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, SCARC, 1939-42. MSS Adamson.
“Driving Bulk Truck on Wheat Ranch Proves Strange Occupation for Girl.” OSU SCARC, Oregon State University. Oregon State Barometer, February 1, 1940, Oregon Digital. Accessed 2023-06-01. https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71p413n.
“General Statement,” School of Home Economics. Oregon State College Course Catalog, 1942-43. SCARC. 333.
Honey, Maureen. “The ‘Womanpower’ Campaign: Advertising and Recruitment Propaganda during World War II.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 6, no. 1/2 (1981): 50–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/3346491.
[i] “General Statement,” School of Home Economics, Oregon State Course Catalog 1942-43, Oregon State University Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC), 333.
ii Doris P. Adamson Scrapbook, Oregon State University SCARC, MSS Adamson.
[iv] Maureen Honey, “The Womanpower’ Campaign: Advertising and Recruitment Propaganda during World War II,” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 6, no. 1/2 (1981): https://doi.org/10.2307/3346491. 50.
