Homepage of the BIPOC Greek Letter Organizations in SCARC new research guide
In honor of Juneteenth, celebrated each year on June 19th to commemorate the emancipation of enslaved people, SCARC is delighted to publish a research guide featuring a curated list of collection materials documenting the histories of BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) Greek Letter Organizations at Oregon State University.
The National Pan-Hellenic Council (the Divine Nine) and the Multicultural Greek Council (consisting of 11 chapters) focus on creating safe and inclusive spaces for students of color on college and university campuses. As part of SCARC’s broader anti-racist and enhanced description efforts that began in 2020, we engaged in a collections survey and conducted research to chronicle the history and activities of these organizations to identify archival collections that would support research on each group (for more information on SCARC’s on-going anti-racist work please see our online guide).
As noted in the guide, the sororities and fraternities featured in this subject guide surfaced as part of our initial round of research into BIPOC Greek life on OSU’s campus. This is an ongoing project for which we will continue to seek out and add materials to our collections, and will update this guide with additional information we or community members surface.
This summer we plan to update relevant archival collection finding aids to highlight specific materials. Look for another blog post later this year with more information documenting our process and providing more context for this project.
During winter term 2025 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!
Blog post written by Whitney Leonard.
During World War II, the increasing demand for farm labor in the United States of America, and the decreasing hands to do so, resulted in national and local initiatives to fulfill labor needs. The larger programs, such as the Bracero program, which contracted temporary workers from Mexico in agreement with the Mexican government, required more localized support, such as the Emergency Farm Labor Program (EFLP), founded by Oregon State College’s (OSC) Extension Services. In a January 1947 twenty-page circular report, OSC Extension Services described to Oregon citizens the role of the EFLP from 1943 to 1946 and its focus on migratory labor moving forward through 1947. OSC’s Extension program proved to be vital to the labor effort through its EFLP and its administration over the Bracero program in Oregon.
OSC cooperated with larger, national organizations to aid the farm labor efforts within Oregon. The Extension Services of OSC, created by the Smith-Lever Act of 1914 to bring specialized research and expertise to the everyday people of Oregon, were given “increased responsibility in 1943 in the recruitment, training and placement of farm labor,” by the U.S. Congress, which allocated 26 million among the states to do so.[i] The Extension Services took on this responsibility through an increased focus on their already established county farm labor subcommittees and the founding of the EFLP.[ii] The 1947 circular report, mentioned above, informed Oregon citizens that the Extension Service of OSC supported the EFLP by providing resources such as statistics to estimate the number of workers needed, placing available workers, organizing training courses, providing instruction on efficient labor practices, and planning for building labor housing.[iii] This was a big task, however, for the main Corvallis EFLP office to take on by itself, which is where the county agents came into play.
The EFLP, based in Corvallis, was simply at the center of this operation, providing aid for county agents who worked diligently for the Extension Services throughout the state. A letter from J.R. Beck, the Corvallis supervisor for the EFLP, dated October 30, 1944, to the county agents, offered support from Corvallis specialists in filing the monthly farm labor reports for their county, which the county agents sent to the Corvallis office responsible for compiling a statewide report.[iv] The April 1944 report disclosed that the number of seasonal workers (2,310) that farmers ordered through the county agents was much higher than year-round workers (479).[v] This means that a county agent would have been tasked with placing workers based on changing needs throughout the year.
J.R. Beck’s Letter to the county agents informing them about the reports, and how they will receive help from the Corvallis EFLP office. J.R. Beck, Letter to “Certain County Agents,” Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, October 30, 1944, SCARC, Extension Service Records, RG 111, Box 67, Farm Labor Emergency, April 1943 – June 1946.
This work clothes advertisement is one of many advertisements that appear in the Medford Mail Tribune that encourage workers to register with the local county farm labor office. “Tough Work Clothes for Pear Pickers and Packers,” (Medford Mail Tribune, July 25, 1943).
The variety and changing nature of labor demands led to the Extension Services mobilizing many different types of workers. The EFLP, in the 1947 circular report, mainly highlighted the placement of 338,542 Oregon women and school children as laborers and even leaders in this operation.[vi] However, when these workers were not enough, the EFLP also placed laborers from Mexico and Jamaica, interned Japanese Americans, and prisoners of war.[vii] While the role of these other workers seems vital, the report leaves these key workers in the margins only in brief comments or even hidden in the captions of photos.
The transcript of a May 30, 1944 Oregon Farm Labor Radio national broadcast on May featuring a discussion between EFLP supervisors William Teutsch and J.R. Beck and a member of the Benton County farm labor committee, Harold G. Rumbaugh, brings the diversity of these workers into clearer view. The three men commented on different types of laborers, such as children, women, discharged soldiers and even Mexican workers, and how the EFLP, along with the county committees, allocated these laborers based on differing needs.[viii] Rumbaugh explained, for example, that his, “community can use local labor better because we do not have enough concentration of jobs at any one time to handle a camp of Mexicans.”[ix] Rumbaugh’s comment demonstrates the thought that went into placements, and how every county committee considered the demands of its community. Although this script provides another mention to Mexican workers, the speakers still leave the origin, purpose, and labor and living conditions of the Mexican migrant workers unclear.
This chart shows the number of Braceros in different states, and in the United States as a whole, across time. A History of the Emergency Farm Labor Program (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1951): 226, SCARC, Extension Service Records, RG 111, Box 67.
The Mexican workers under the jurisdiction of the EFLP in Oregon were contracted through the 1942 Bracero agreement, which was one major effort by the United States government to create a sufficient labor force during World War II. The U.S. State Department, the Department of Labor, and the Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) collectively established the August 1942 Public Law-45, and they did so in collaboration with Mexico. At the time, the U.S. War Manpower Commission, founded by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942 to address and estimate labor needs, predicted an overwhelming need for farm laborers.[x] The purpose of this Bracero agreement was to fulfill this great need, and, for INS purposes, to prevent farmers from contracting undocumented workers.[xi] Through the Bracero program, and “Operation Wetback,” where the INS deported undocumented migrants to then return them to the same farmers as Braceros, the INS provided a controlled labor force from Mexico.[xii] Although responsible for the Bracero program on an administrative level, these national agencies did not work alone.
The EFLP found the Bracero workers, as they were very able to adapt, to be very fitting for their shifting labor needs based on the seasons. Beck comments, in the same radio script mentioned above, that “1944 production could not be harvested without the aid of Mexicans,” and the EFLP, “hope to have enough Mexican labor to put into the 20 or more districts where extra help must be had.”[xiii] While a shortage in labor made these workers important, their ability to pick up the slack when children returned to school in September and for working, “distant from centers of population,” as a 1944 newspaper comments, seemed to make them perfect for the job.[xiv] One example of adaptability was on August 6, 1945, when Beck announced that Mexican workers would be moved to agricultural adjacent jobs, such as working in processing plants during a downturn in agricultural labor needs.[xv] Even though the Bracero workers met specific needs, the EFLP had an understanding that the program would be short lived.
Despite the EFLP’s original thinking, the program continued for many more years. After the war it was clear, through EFLP news notes from August 16, 1945, that jobs for returning military workers would be prioritized, and the United States would begin to repatriate Mexican workers.[xvi] This did not mean, however, that the Bracero Program in Oregon was over. Instead, in late August 1945, the OSC Extension Services aided in, “camp construction and loaning tents, tent platforms, cots, mattresses and tables” to a migratory farm camp in Malin (Klamath County).[xvii] As the Bracero program continued to thrive, it is clear how important these workers were to the EFLP in handling the shifting conditions of the agricultural industry during and after World War II.
Photo of Klamath county living quarters at the labor camp in 1943 which OSC donated to and helped construct. “Sleeping quarters,” Braceros in Oregon Photograph Collection, Oregon State University.
This segment from the Springfield News comments on the flexibility and ability of Mexican workers. “Oregon’s Fall Harvest Calls 50,000 Pickers,” The Springfield News, August 24, 1944.
Despite the support the Braceros provided to the American agriculture industry, they received little respect in return. The Bracero workers, unlike undocumented laborers, “received housing (albeit meager), food, transportation, and a greater assurance that they would in fact be paid for their work.”[xviii] However, the working conditions were difficult and hazardous, causing injuries.[xix] Additionally, Braceros often lived in tents, had little to eat, and received subpar medical treatment, if any.[xx] These workers, placed in an unfamiliar, and sometimes hostile, situation, had to make the decision between the path of least resistance, or the more risky path of authorship in their own story.
Braceros, decided to not be passive victims, but worked diligently to advocate for their rights. Braceros were able to protest more in the Northwest, where the workers were said to be, “constantly on strike.”[xxi] However, closer to the Mexican border, in the Southwest, where farmers more readily returned rebellious Braceros for new ones, there were limited strike efforts.[xxii] Furthermore, the Mexican government worked to protect Bracero workers. For example, Mexican officials ended the flow of Braceros to Texas and Idaho because of high rates of discrimination in those states.[xxiii] It is clear that the Bracero program was more than a neutral labor exchange. Due to the power differential, the United States actors took advantage of the Braceros. However, the Braceros also proved themselves to be active participants in their own history.
This image shows a dining tent in Hood River County where the Braceros would’ve eaten. “Dining area,” Braceros in Oregon Photograph Collection, Oregon State University.
This picture shows Bracero workers pulling onions in Klamath County in 1943. “Pulling Onions,” Braceros in Oregon Photograph Collection, Oregon State University.
In sum, the expertise of Oregon State College, with support from both the U.S. government and county agents, created and ran a program which aided Oregon farmers in fulfilling labor requests fit to their circumstances. The interdependence of these actors within the Bracero Program and the EFLP, spanning all the way from the national level to the state level all the way down to the individual farmers and workers, shows the complexity of programs such as these. The intricacies of every actor’s interest, as well as their power to enforce their interests, shaped these farm labor programs. The Bracero Program and the EFLP continued after the war to support the national interest of the United States. The end of the EFLP, in 1947, however, did not even mark the end of the Bracero program, which operated until 1964. Even today we can see the ripple effects of these programs in the faces of agricultural workers, and the United States’ interdependence on undocumented Mexican labor.
[i] Frank Llewellyn Ballard, The Oregon State University Federal Cooperative Extension Service:1911-1961 (Oregon State University Extension Services, 1960), 1, 22, Oregon State University (hereafter OSU), Scholars Archive, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/technical_reports/c821gq42j?locale=en; “Rieder Starts Labor Checkup,” The Oregon Statesman, May 27, 1943 4, Historic Oregon Newspapers (hereafter HON), University of Oregon (UO) https://oregonnews.uoregon.edu/lccn/sn85042470/1943-05-27/ed-1/seq-4/#words=county+farm+labor+subcommittee
[iii] Oregon State College Extension Services, Fighters on the Farm Front: A Story of the 1943-46 Oregon Emergency Farm Labor Program (Oregon State Federal Cooperative Extension Services, 1947), 2,10,13-15, OSU, Scholars Archive, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/technical_reports/br86b846h.
[iv] J.R. Beck, Letter to “Certain County Agents,” Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, October 30, 1944, Special Collections and Archives Research Center at Oregon State University (hereafter SCARC), Extension Service Records (RG 111), Box 67, Farm Labor Emergency, April 1943 – June 1946.
[v] “State Farm Labor Report,” Oregon State University Extension Services, April 5, 1944, SCARC, Extension Service Records (RG 111), Box 67, Farm Labor Emergency, April 1943 – June 1946.
[vi] Oregon State College Extension Services, Fighters on the Farm Front, 4.
[vii] Oregon State College Extension Services, Fighters on the Farm Front, 7.
[viii] William L. Teutsch, J.R. Beck and Harold G. Rumbaugh, “Script for National Broadcast,” Oregon Farm Labor Radio, May 30, 1944, 1-4, SCARC, Extension Service Records (RG 111), Box 67, SG 2 Director’s Office: IX: Projects, Extension Specialists: Farm Labor Emergency Radio.
[ix] William L. Teutsch, J.R. Beck and Harold G. Rumbaugh, “Script for National Broadcast,” 3.
[x] Erasmo Gamboa, “Braceros in the Pacific Northwest,” Pacific Historical Review 56, no. 3 (1987): 379, https://doi.org/10.2307/3638664; Marjorie S. Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers: The Bracero Program and the INS,” review of Inside the State: The Bracero Program, Immigration, and the I.N.S. by Kitty Calavita and Mexican Labor and World War II: Braceros in the Pacific Northwest, 1942-1947 by Erasmo Gamboa. Law and Society Review 26, no. 4 (1993): 851, https://doi.org/10.2307/3053955.
[xi] Erasmo Gamboa, “Braceros in the Pacific Northwest,” 379; Marjorie S. Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers,” 851.
[xii] Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers,” 853.
[xiii] William L. Teutsch, J.R. Beck and Harold G. Rumbaugh, “Script for National Broadcast,” 3-4.
[xv] Fred M. Shideler, “Farm Labor News Notes,” Oregon State College Extension Services, August 6, 1945, SCARC, Extension Service Records (RG 111), Box 67, Farm Labor News Notes.
[xvi] Fred M. Shideler, “Farm Labor News Notes,” Oregon State College Extension Services, August 16, 1945, SCARC, Extension Service Records (RG 111), Box 67, Farm Labor News Notes.
[xvii] Fred M. Shideler, “Farm Labor News Notes,” Oregon State College Extension Services, August 27, 1945, SCARC, Extension Service Records (RG 111), Box 67, Farm Labor News Notes.
[xviii] Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers,” 852.
[xix] Gamboa, “Braceros in the Pacific Northwest,” 390.
[xx] Gamboa, “Braceros in the Pacific Northwest,” 381-384, 389-390.
[xxi] Gamboa, “Braceros in the Pacific Northwest,” 393-394; Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers,” 855.
[xxii] Gamboa, “Braceros in the Pacific Northwest,” 393-394; Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers,” 855.
[xxiii] Zatz, “Using and Abusing Mexican Farmworkers,” 856.
During winter term 2025 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!
Blog post written by Sylas Allen.
In July 1862, the United States government granted thirty-thousand acres of federal land to the states for the purpose of building universities. These universities aimed to fulfill this mission by creating institutions that would instruction in the fields of science, classical studies, agriculture and mechanical arts. Oregon State University (formerly Oregon State College) got its start as a one of these land grant colleges in 1868. In his book The People’s School: a History of Oregon State University, historian William Robbins writes, “Oregon State University exemplifies the importance of federal initiatives in fostering agricultural experiment stations, extension programs, and oceanic and space related research.”1
Today we see many different course offerings at Oregon State and many choices for majors and studies. However, expanding the curriculum took time and effort to get where it is now. One large push towards expanding and diversifying curriculum occurred during World War II. This unexpected change happened in part due to the soldiers Oregon State College (OSC) housed on campus during the war. Many college campuses were charged with hosting Army training operations. OSC’s Army Navy Specialized Training Program (A.S.T.P) created demand for an expanded liberal arts program. The A.S.T.P aimed to create technicians and specialists for the army, and sent these men to a variety of colleges and institutions for the purpose of receiving academic instruction deemed important towards serving their positions for the army.2 The army needed soldiers that had fundamental understandings of the conflict and political science and history classes were considered important foundations along with language classes (primarily German). The demand for these courses helped to push OSC authorities into expanding and improving upon their liberal arts offerings.
Published in October 1940, the 1939-1940 Biennial Report book from The Oregon State Board of Higher Education contains information about colleges and universities in the area, including their budgets, departments, and changes within them. In the past, liberal arts and humanities courses at OSC were referred to as “Lower Divison” or “Service Courses” and these programs were smaller and received less funding than the sciences. According to the budget for the year of 1938-1939, OSC spent a total of $68,838.10 on Arts and Letters, Lower Division and Service Courses (English, Modern Languages, Public Speaking and Drama). Social Science, Lower Division and Service Courses (Economics, History, Philosophy, Psychology, and Sociology) received even less at a total of $36,990.58 for the year. This number is markedly lower compared what OSC gave to the School of Science (Dean of Science, Bacteriology, Botany, Chemistry, Entomology, Geology, Mathematics, Physics, Zoology and Science Survey). Their funding was a total of $202,640.52 throughout the year.3 This shows that the humanities was an underdeveloped program at the time.
Information on funding from the 1939-1940 Biennial Report Book. Shows how much money each department received within the year and divides it further into subcategories. Found in SCARC, Annual and Biennial Reports, Box 6 Folder 1.
Two Oregon State College Catalogs, one from 1940-1941 the other from 1943-1944, record enrollment numbers divided by major. Liberal Arts and Sciences in 1940-1941 had a total of 628 students enrolled in Lower Division courses.4 I hypothesized that enrollment numbers would be lower for 1943-1944 as enrollment rates dropped during the war. However, we can see that the number of students enrolled for Lower Division during this year was actually higher, at 713.5 This increase in students could be because of an uptick in students studying foreign language, history, or politics to aid the war effort. These classes provided foundational information to help understand and aid the conflict and build better informed citizens. Within administrative records there is record of a discussion about curriculum from March 10, 1942. During this meeting, Chancellor Frederick M. Hunter stated, “Characteristically all of the separate type have as a core curriculum basic science, and correlated and closely knit with this, broadening and liberalizing courses in language and social sciences. This, Oregon State College should have in considerably fuller provisions than it has at present.”6
More than three decades later, former OSC President August Strand observed in a 1975 interview that until 1953, OSC was still an agricultural college and was criticized during the war for not having a College of Liberal Arts.7 Unfortunately, he listed no further details about who specifically had criticized OSC or what was said. Another Biennial Report from 1941-1942 examined current liberal arts offerings and stated that OSC experiences, “the dominant interest in land-grant college education directed towards the applications of science.” The report then discusses ensuring that liberal arts education is up to standard.8
In November, 1941 Delmer Goode—a prominent figure within the OSC Publications department who advocated for changes regarding curriculum and higher standards—published a report titled “How ‘Complete’ is Oregon State College As a ‘Separate’ Land Grant Institution?.”9 In it he compared OSC to other universities and stated that the curriculum was “deficient in major opportunities in both liberal arts and professional fields.”10 In 1942, M Ellwood Smith, Dean of Lower Division, sent a letter to Goode drawing his attention to the new courses OSC had started offering that year. Smith noted a new course in Russian, and explained that new courses in English, American-European History, and other Lower Division courses provided foundational information to officers in training.11 An Oregon State Barometer article published in April 1942 and titled “New Courses Added to Meet Educational Needs of Oregon” discussed plans to “liberalize the curricula of the entire institution to meet the needs of modern citizenship training.”12 In January 1943, another Oregon State Barometer article talked about the A.S.T.P and their development of planned curriculum for their officers in training. It detailed coursework and training hours and shared that the army and a panel of specialists were working to create this curriculum and training plan.13
A.S.T.P associated Russian language class at OSC. Historical Images of Oregon State University, “Russian language class,” Oregon Digital.
Despite the lack of specific classes, given what we know about the A.S.T.P and their goals for creating soldiers with foundational knowledge, at least some of this planned coursework would be Lower Division. A report from Winter Term 1944 shows that the curriculum would contain “Modern History and Contemporary World Affairs, 4 hours; Language Study, 13 hours; Police Science and Law Enforcement, 1 hour” along with several other items.14 These planned curriculum changes show us that OSC administration was listening to demands from faculty for new classes and were implementing new courses in order to meet these requests.
Notes about what new curriculum is being added to meet A.S.T.P demands. Details what is being added and how many hours will be required. Annual and Biennial Reports, SCARC, Box 9 Folder 9; Winter 1944.
OSC was not the only institution going through curriculum changes during WWI; military training programs pushed other universities similarly to alter their curriculum. According to historian V.R. Cardozier, “almost 200 [small colleges] did attract college training programs sponsored by the military services.”15 Cardozier also shares that the war spurred greater interest in “social sciences, history, languages, politics, and international relations.”16 History and political science courses helped give students a better understanding of the current conflict through a more comprehensive grasp on the politics that caused it. Language courses provided valuable information to officers in training, especially with new German classes. Even without war influences on campuses, the period of 1920 to the 1950s was a time where many land-grant colleges wanted to start offering better liberal arts education. Educator Roger L. Geiger discusses this and the history of liberal arts education in his book The History of American Higher Education: Learning and Culture from the Founding to WWII. He shares that in the 1920s new standards were being created by education boards for teachers colleges. These new standards wanted to shape courses in the name of professionalism. Those in charge of higher education standards planned to remove any curriculum that was seen as not having functional value—primarily liberal arts courses. However educators and teachers disagreed with this course cutting approach. Geiger states, “By 1940 one-half of their [California state colleges’] enrollments were in liberal arts… However, other states failed to follow California’s lead until after the surge of postwar veterans under the GI Bill forced teachers’ colleges to expand enrollment and offerings.”17 This paints a picture of higher demand for a diverse education which included better developed liberal arts programs. These sources show us that OSC was not alone in experiencing pressure for diversified education.
Oregon State University has evolved much since its conception as an institution, and over time students have changed and so have their needs in regards to curriculum. We can very clearly track a shift within the WWII era encouraging colleges to offer more foundational liberal arts teaching. This shift happened not only within OSC but also within other colleges and universities across the country and it greatly improved course offerings. We can clearly see a correlation between A.S.T.P presence and the increase in class offerings within the liberal arts due to demands from military trainees and their leadership. This coursework provided students and soldiers in training with a more suitable framework for understanding the war and understanding the ways in which they could aid the war effort. Prior to this research, I would not have connected those two items but the story being told here begs to differ.
1William Robbins, The People’s School: A History of Oregon State University (Oregon State University Press,2017), 1.
3Oregon State System of Higher Education, “Biennial Report 1939-1940,” Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC), RG 013-SG12 Annual and Biennial Reports, Box 6, Folder 1.
4Oregon State University, “General Catalog, 1940-1941,” Oregon Digital, 492, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719v902
5Oregon State University, “General Catalog, 1943-1944,” Oregon Digital, 377, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719v93w
6Administrative Council Records, SCARC, Box-folder 2.4, 55, 1941-1955.
9Delmer Goode worked within the Publications department at OSC and was later declared the first director of Publications. He worked on an academic journal titled Improving College and University Teaching. There are many mentions of letters and reports from him about how OSC could improve its curriculum or teachings to better serve its students and faculty.
10Delmer Goode, “How Complete is Oregon State College as a “Separate” Land Grant Institution?” 1941, SCARC, Institution Memorabilia Collection, 97.11.pdf.
11Oregon State University President’s Office Records, Oregon State University, “President’s Office General Subject File, Audit Reports, Correspondence reports with State Board of Higher Education Curricula, 1940-1942,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/qv33rz03k.
12Oregon State Barometer, April 29, 1942, Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71p7448.
13Oregon State Barometer, January 26, 1943, Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/871nj33f.
14Dean M Elwood, Winter Term Curriculum, 1944, SCARC, Historic Publications Collection, RG 013-5G12, Annual and Biennial Reports, Box 9, Folder 9.
15V.R. Cardozier, Colleges and Universities in World War II (Praeger, 1993), 109–19.
16Cardozier, Colleges and Universities in World War II, 109–19.
17 R.L Geiger, The history of American higher education : learning and culture from the founding to World War II (Princeton University Press, 2015), 436-438.
The OSU Queer Archives hosted a booth at OSU’s June 2nd Pride event in the MU Quad and we had a blast! Lots of organizations shared information with the hundreds of attendees, there was an assortment of games, crafts, a photo booth, and free rainbow tamales, and Poison Waters and her friends performed a special drag show on the steps of the MU – they were all fabulous!
OSQA Booth
We had over 150 people stop by to view the materials and/or chat with us! We featured copies of materials from a few of our collections including the Corvallis Lesbian Avengers Collection, the After 8 Records, and The Lavender Network Newsmagazine. We also included some materials pertaining to general information for archiving personal papers and some newsletters from the Society of American Archives Archival Outlook newsletter that showcased how archives across the nation support traditionally marginalized communities. And, we gave away free Pride themed as well as cute Benny the Beaver pins 🙂
Photos of the Event
BONUS: Pride Display at the OSU Pride Center
OSQA shared digitized content from various collections for the OSU Pride Center to showcase as part of their renovated space, which includes permanent display space!
Sol: LGBTQ+ Multicultural Support Network Collection: The Sol: LGBTQ+ Multicultural Support Network Collection consists of records and materials documenting Sol’s history, from its beginning in the early 2000s up to its operations in 2023, at Oregon State University. Sol’s intention is to create spaces that celebrate the intersectional identities of queer and trans people of color. Sol works closely with the Pride Center (historically known as the Queer Resource Center), as well as other Cultural Resource Centers on campus. The collection contains administrative and programming records, as well as art related materials. The collection contains digital and physical items, including oversize materials. Sol related oral history interviews can be found in the OSU Queer Archives Oral History Collection.
Ellen and Carolyn Dishman Papers: The Ellen and Carolyn Dishman Papers are the collected materials and photography by the Dishmans documenting their involvement at Oregon State University in the late 1990s to early 2000s. As OSU students, they were involved in prominent LGBTQ+ groups on campus and served as primary advocates for the establishment of the Queer Resource Center (QRC) in 2001; the QRC is now called the Pride Center.
Pride Center (RG 236) (currently closed for processing): The Pride Center serves as Oregon State University’s resource center for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) members of the OSU community and their allies. In addition to its roles in outreach and education, the center provides a safe space for anyone in the community to “explore aspects of sexual orientation and gender identity in an open and non-judgmental atmosphere.”
Corvallis Lesbian Avengers Collection: The Corvallis Lesbian Avengers Collection documents the activities of the Corvallis chapter of the Lesbian Avengers throughout the 1990s. The Corvallis Lesbian Avengers were a local chapter of the national Lesbian Avengers organization. Originally formed in 1992 in New York City, the Lesbian Avengers were a direct-action group focused on issues vital to lesbian survival and visibility. The bulk of the collection is made up of photo albums and scrapbooks containing photographs, news clippings, flyers, artwork, poetry, and other paper material. The collection also includes a small collection of artifacts, an annotated calendar, and 3 issues of the Necessary Friction zine produced by the Corvallis Lesbian Avengers.
During winter term 2025 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!
Blog post written by Nicholas Nowak.
As World War II began, and especially as the U.S. entered the war after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, virtually all institutions, from colleges and universities to film companies, adjusted their functioning to respond to the new environment and needs created by the war. These institutions had new restraints (lower enrollment and loss of faculty), opportunities (funding from the War Department), and goals (contributing to the war effort and preparing for the end of the war) that made change necessary. Colleges in particular had to adjust their functioning as the role of colleges and education in general grew.
Oregon State College (OSC, now Oregon State University), was no exception. One document, titled “Minutes of Meeting November 4, 1943,” offers insight into how the OSC administration responded to the war.[i] This document was likely typed by a secretary during the Administrative Councils November 4th, 1943 meeting for use by the meeting attendees. The OSC Administrative Council, consisting of the president and deans, attended this meeting to discuss current operations and potential changes at the college. The War Fund Canvas, a fundraising venture for the war set up by the community, was discussed, with the attendees claiming they exceeded the set quota by raising $5,394.57. The attendees also spent the majority of the time discussing the curriculum, particularly how they should change it for the upcoming year and after the end of the war.
This information offers some insight into how the administration changed in response to the war by taking practical steps towards contributing to the war effort and adjusting the curriculum. Overall, OSC, like most colleges in the U.S., faced increased restraints during the war due to limited resources, and responded by adjusting the curriculum and directly aiding and contributing to the U.S. war effort.
The war created a variety of new problems and issues that colleges throughout the U.S. had to respond to. After the U.S. entered the war in late 1941, many young men who would have previously gone to college entered the military, decreasing male enrollment throughout the country. This left a variety of jobs, particularly manufacturing jobs, open to be filled by women, who also would have previously gone to college, decreasing female enrollment throughout the U.S.[ii] Given enrollment was a significant source of funding for most colleges, college administrators had to find new ways of funding their colleges (which will be discussed later). Faculty at colleges also entered into military or war related services, even if it wasn’t the military itself. This resulted in some departments, such as the psychology department at OSC, losing a significant amount of faculty. The psychology department had four full-time staff before the war, which turned into one full-time staff member with two emergency appointments. This loss of faculty made it difficult for those departments to function.[iii] The OSC administrators were concerned about how this loss of faculty might impact the ability of the college to function, as seen in the 1944 Biennial Report for the Lower Division and Service Departments. During the war, OSC administrators even considered cutting certain programs, for example, the biology program.[iv] While it is unclear why administrators thought biology should be cut specifically, given their concerns about the loss of faculty and lower income due to lower enrollment, it is possible administrators thought cuts were necessary, and prioritized cutting programs that were not as important to the military (engineering and humanities programs were particularly important to the military). The OSC administrators’ concerns, overall, related to their ability to keep the college operational amid the scarcity of students, faculty, and funds created by the war effort.
Image from the OSC general catalog of 1943-44, outlining some of the main changes OSC administrators made to the curriculum and institutions in response to the war. “General Catalog, 1943-1944.”
OSC administrators responded to these concerns and restraints partially by adjusting and adapting their curriculum. As mentioned earlier, administrators had to seek out alternative sources of funding amid declining enrollment, and one major source of funding came from the War Department. Many colleges in the U.S. adapted their curriculum to better suit the needs of the War Department in order to attract more funding and support.[v] Initially, the military focused on engineering related education, because they needed officers who understood how to use certain technology, but as the war dragged on, the military also began prioritizing humanities education. The military had to send soldiers to a variety of different locations in Europe and Asia during WWII, so having soldiers and officers well versed in the language, culture, and geography of the areas they were serving in became important.[vi] OSC, while initially an engineering and science school, expanded into the humanities. OSC administrators became increasingly concerned with creating viable and useful humanities programs for the war effort.[vii] OSC also offered different, special registration and starting dates for students enrolled in the ASTP (a World War II program that trained officers and soldiers in technical skills necessary for the war effort, such as in engineering and languages).[viii] OSC did not offer special registration and starting dates before WWII,[ix] and stopped immediately after the war ended.[x] OSC also emphasized physically training students to better prepare them for the demands of the war.[xi] These changes administrators made to the curriculum demonstrate that OSC adapted to the restraints brought on by the war, particularly financial ones, by aiding the needs and goals of the War Department.
August 1941 advertisement in the Oregon newspaper The Bend Bulletin, looking for volunteer soldiers to go to Europe or Asia. This advertisement demonstrates the need the military had for language and other cultural programs. “A Good Job for You,” The Bend Bulletin, August 26, 1941: 2, Historic Oregon Newspapers.
These changes, while likely being adopted partially because of financial restraints, may also have been adopted due to administrators’ desires for a U.S. victory in WWII, given OSC went out of their way to contribute to the war effort in much more direct ways. As mentioned earlier, OSC began a War Fund Canvas to help raise money for the war effort.[xii] On top of this, in 1943, administrators implemented a war bond buying program.[xiii] This program, set up by individual towns and cities, helped raise money for the war effort by buying bonds from the government, so that the government could fund the war, then pay back the buyers at a later date. The athletic department alone bought $15,000 worth of war bonds to kick off sales on the first day. The administration also created a program where students rolled bandages to contribute to the medical needs imposed by the war.[xiv] These efforts likely wouldn’t have been necessary to receive additional funding from the War Department, indicating that while some of the administration’s contributions to the war effort were likely an attempt to gain additional funding, it’s also likely that the administration was genuinely concerned about the U.S. winning the war.
Page from the 1943 OSC yearbook showing a billboard encouraging people to take the train rather than driving, in response to gas rations.[i] This demonstrates some of the changes both OSC staff and students underwent in response to the war. Beaver yearbook, 1943.
The war forced the administrators of OSC, like the administrators at most U.S. colleges, to adapt to new demands and a new environment. OSC, like many colleges in the U.S., saw enrollment decline, and with it, funding. They also saw faculty leave for military related service, further contributing to the difficulties of keeping the college running during the war. Partially in response to these challenges, OSC adjusted its curriculum to better serve the needs of the War Department and prepare students for war. OSC administrators did, however, also contribute to the war effort beyond what was necessary to get increased funding, such as by engaging in fundraising efforts and implementing bandage rolling programs.
[i] “Minutes of Meeting November 4, 1943,” Oregon State University Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC), Administrative Council Records RG 032, Box 1, Administrative Council Minutes 1941-1942 to 1945-1946.
[ii] Taylor Jaworski, “‘You’re in the Army Now:’ The Impact of World War II on Women’s Education, Work, and Family,” The Journal of Economic History 74, no. 1 (2014): 174-176, doi:10.1017/S0022050714000060.
[iii] M. Ellwood Smith, “Biennial Report, Lower Division and Service Departments 1942-43 and 1943-44,” 1944, SCARC, Annual and Biennial Reports RG 013 – SG 12, Box 9, Folder 9.
[iv] F. A. Gilfillan, “Biennial Report, School of Science 1942-43 and 1943-44,” 1944, SCARC, Annual and Biennial Reports RG 013 – SG 12, Box 9, Folder 9.
[v] Charles Dorn, “Promoting the ‘Public Welfare’ in Wartime: Stanford University during World War II,” American Journal of Education 112, no. 1 (2005): 108, doi: 10.1086/444525.
[vi] William Robbins, The People’s School: A History of Oregon State University (Chicago: Oregon State University Press, 2017), 152-156.
[vii] M. Ellwood Smith, “Oregon State College, Lower Division,” 1944, SCARC, Annual and Biennial Reports, RG 013 – SG 12, Box 9, Folder 9.
During winter term 2025 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!
Blog post written by Michael Metz.
Ralph Besse served as the assistant director for the School of Agriculture during the war.
When the United States entered World War II in December 1941, nationwide mobilization to contribute to the war effort began. The economy saw rapid changes to meet the needs of the US and its allies in the fight against the axis powers. In 1944, Ernest Wiegand, the director of Oregon State College’s (OSC) Food Industries Department, sent a report to Ralph Besse, the assistant director of the School of Agriculture. This report details the activities of the department’s research station, which included several food preservation methods such as: freezing, canning, and dehydrating. The college was using federal funding to carry out studies related to food preservation.[i] This funding was critical to the college’s contributions to the war effort. During the Second World War, OSC aided the war effort by conducting research on food preservation and production, as well as educating the public on how to increase food production and how to preserve it more efficiently.
The report, released in 1944, provides insight into OSC’s role in food preservation studies. It was written by Ernest Wiegand for Ralph Besse. The report’s purpose was to inform Besse, and likely other department members, on the food preservation research that the department was conducting. This would have been important especially when considering that the school was using federal funding directed towards agricultural research. This includes the Purnell Funds, an agricultural-based federal grant. Wiegand wrote this report in 1944 and it describes types of food the department was freezing, canning, and dehydrating—mostly fruits and vegetables. This document serves as an introduction to OSC’s involvement in the effort to increase the country’s food stock during the war, as it provides readers with information on the type of work the college was doing and introduces important figures in the School of Agriculture.
Ernest Wiegand was an integral figure in the college’s research into food preservation.
Wiegand’s report is an example of OSC’s contribution to food preservation and production, but it does not entirely illustrate the school’s agricultural research during the war. Through the Federal Cooperative Extension Service at OSC, the school conducted intensive research on food science. The Extension Service, an OSC program focused on community education, was mobilized during the war and staff were ordered by the college to make the war effort their top priority.[ii] Researching food preservation became a major focus of the extension service and Ernest Wiegand worked with the program to tackle a variety of issues regarding food preservation. A major issue that the country faced was maintaining the nutritious value of preserved food. In fact, according to the Journal of Environmental Studies and Science, when the United States entered the war, “two out of five US men could not serve because of disabilities related to malnutrition, especially rickets.”[iii] This reality prompted the need for better nutrition in the country.
In 1944, Wiegand and other members of OSC extension service studied freezing as a method of preserving perishable food, in particular meat and poultry. Their study, titled “Food Preservation by Freezing,” reports that when freezing food, “a greater quantity of essential vitamins can be preserved; less labor and time are required for preparation; and the finished product more closely resembles fresh food in palatability and appearance.”[iv] A common theme in OSC’s research into food preservation during the war was nutrient retention. Food that wouldn’t spoil and would also maintain much of its nutritious value was not just valuable for soldiers, but also for civilians faced with the challenge of rationing. Wiegand and his colleagues’ report provides the reader with information on how to improve the value of food with proper preservation. Their suggestions include selecting the proper ripeness of a fruit or vegetable, immediately freezing food after picking it, and how to properly blanch foods.[v] A year later, Wiegand and other researchers investigated methods to improve dehydration of berries and cherries grown in Oregon. Their findings include viable procedures for effective dehydration, techniques for retaining higher vitamin content, and different uses for dehydrated fruits.[vi] Despite the war coming to an end, the need for food preservation was not over, as many nations were facing food shortages. While these findings may not be revolutionary, they serve as a valuable educational resource that OSC would utilize in its outreach to communities across Oregon.
OSC’s effort to improve food preservation and production during the war extended out of the lab and into the community. With the nation facing food shortages, many ingredients were subjected to rationing. Products such as sugar were in high demand and in order to obtain them for canning, Oregonians were required to apply to receive an allotment of one pound per four quarts of canned fruit, plus an extra pound for each household member.[vii] This restriction was necessary for the country to keep its armies fed, but it put a strain on Americans who depended on ingredients like sugar to properly preserve much of their food. Extension services played a variety of important roles in order to ensure that people across the state had the knowledge and resources they needed to make an impact in the war effort. The Medford Mail Tribune reported that OSC sent a survey to homemakers, on behalf of the War Production Board (WPB), in 1943 to assess their knowledge of food preservation and the need for preservation equipment in Jackson County.[viii] Surveys such as this were useful in assessing the needs of Oregonians and were just one way the college provided community support during the war. Another task the college faced was increasing the state’s food production. OSC Extension Service reported that in 1943, for the third straight year, Oregon’s total crop acreage harvested and total livestock was at an all-time high. However, the state’s farmers had been tasked by the government with increasing that acreage to 151,000 acres in 1944.[ix] This was a major challenge for Oregonians, as labor was already hard to come by since many of the state’s men were deployed overseas.
A 4-H club advertisement. Across the country these clubs rallied to increase food output. “4-H Victory Week Ad From 1942,” National WW2 Museum.
The task largely fell on Oregon’s youth. OSC Extension Service, as well as other extension services across the state, was directed by the state to mobilize Oregon’s 4-H clubs. 4-H clubs are youth clubs that provide children with leadership opportunities in their community. Across the country, 4-H clubs tasked their members with a variety of projects aimed at increasing food production. Their efforts earned the recognition of President Roosevelt who, in 1944, called them the “shock troops of food production.”[x] OSC was essential in organizing Oregon’s 4-H clubs. Extension services were tasked by the state with organizing the state’s clubs, as well as increasing club membership from the 25,000 youth members serving in the club at the start of the war. State leaders had identified 80,000 children across the state as eligible to join.[xi] However, this was not a program unique to Oregon. Across the country, 4-H clubs were mobilized with the help of local and federal governments, and were given the goal of increasing food output. In Utah, two teenagers and 4-H members, ages 13 and 15, received awards for producing and preserving the most food from their victory gardens. Their gardens turned a combined profit of $208.[xii] From victory gardens to farm labor, the nation’s youth were essential in winning the war at home and in Oregon, OSC’s effort to rally teenagers to the cause was invaluable.
During World War II, Oregon State College played a critical role in improving food production methods and community outreach to increase knowledge of food preservation and to increase production. From breakthroughs in the lab, to community engagement, the college was a key player in Oregon’s contribution to the war effort. However, OSC was not alone in this endeavor. Educational institutions across the country were vital in keeping the nation afloat during the war and continued to aid the country well after its conclusion.
[i] Ernest Wiegand, “Report Station Activities – 1943-44,” Oregon State University Special Collections and Archives Research Center (hereafter SCARC), Annual and Biennial Reports: Farm Crops, Farm Management, Fish and Game Management RG 25 – SG 1, Box 1.
[ii] Frank Ballard, “The Oregon State University Federal Cooperative Extension Service: 1911-1961,” 21, Scholar’s Archive at OSU, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/technical_reports/c821gq42j.
[iii] Alesia Maltz, ““Plant a victory garden: our food is fighting’: Lessons of food resilience from World War,” Journal of Environmental Studies and Science 5 (2015): 392-403, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0293-1.
[iv] Ernest Wiegand, et al, “Food Preservation by Freezing,” Scholar’s Archive at OSU (1943): 2, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/administrative_report_or_publications/0g354k10d.
[v] Wiegand, et al, “Food Preservation by Freezing,” 16.
[vi] Ernest Wiegand, et al, “Development of a commercially feasible method of producing dehydrated berries and cherries,” Scholar’s Archive at OSU (1945): 42, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/technical_reports/bv73c8011.
[vii] Glen Schaeffer, “Housewives Given Canning O.K.,” Oregon State Barometer, April 22, 1943, Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/8k71nj813.
[viii] Richard McMillan, “Jackson County Pantries, Lockers Bulge with Food,” Medford Mail Tribune, November 16, 1943, https://oregonnews.uoregon.edu/lccn/sn97071090/1943-11-16/ed-1/seq-10/#words=food+preservation+preserved.
[ix] William Schoenfeld, Oregon Food-For-Victory Objectives, Scholar’s Archive at OSU (1944): 3, https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/administrative_report_or_publications/h415pf30f.
[x] Katherine Sundgren, “Feeding Victory: 4-H, Extension, and the World War II Food Effort,” Online Journal of Rural Research and Policy 14, no. 3 (2019): 7, https://doi.org/10.4148/1936-0487.1098.
[xi] “Youths of Oregon to be Mobilized for Victory,” Beaverton Enterprise, January 1, 1943, https://oregonnews.uoregon.edu/lccn/sn96088480/1943-01-01/ed-1/seq-1/#words=Extension+OSC+service+Service.
