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.
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.
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.
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.
[viii] “General Catalog, 1943-1944,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719v93w.
[ix] “General Catalog, 1938-1939,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719v86g.
[x] “General Catalog, 1947-1948,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719v84x.
[xi] “The Beaver 1943,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719t41x.
[xii] “Minutes of Meeting November 4, 1943.”
[xiii] “The Beaver 1943,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719t41x.
[xiv] “The Beaver 1943,” Oregon Digital, https://oregondigital.org/concern/documents/fx719t41x.
