University of Michigan Medical and Nursing School - Aequanimitas Yearbook (Ann Arbor, MI)

Page 124 text:

- scfgppg -- Concerning the Need of A New Emphasis in the Education of the Nurse Shirley C. Titus HE BIRTH of the democratic ideal into the world has had a far-reaching effect upon education. In a society where the government rests upon the masses, the preparation of the masses for citizenship becomes of a necessity one of the gravest and most important of social problems. The school likewise is forced to assume a new role and the aims or objectives uf education become complex and diversified. V ln 1918 a commission was appointed by the National liducation .Xssociation to study ways and means of reorganizing secondary education, The report of this commission, among other things, set forth in an admirable wav the main objectives ot education in a democracy. The activities of the individual were first analyzed and the commission reports as follows in regard to such activities: Nor- mally the individual is a member of a family. of a vocational group, of various civic groups, and by virtue of these relationships he is called upon to engage in activities that enrich the family life, to render important vocational services to his fellows, and to promote the coinon welfare. ln the light of such analysis the commission sets forth the following objectives of a democratic education, namely: Qlj Health, txlj Command of fundamental processes, 135 XYortliy home- membership, tx-lj Vocation, L51 Citizenship, 1,67 XYorthy use of leisure, 479 lith- ical character. These ideal objectives have not been received whole-heartedly by all educa- tional groups, for the educational world is at the present time divided into two great camps, namely the cultural education group and the vocational education group, and each of these two groups, even if they accepted in theory these educa- tional objectives, would tind the carrying out of such objectives impossible with- out a radical change in their philosophy of education. The cultural education group sincerely believe that when a subject is pur- sued with the view of ultimately gaining a livelihood from it that such an education is not the highest or best form of education-that it is, in fact. hardly education fas they see educationb at all. Learning as a preparation for a life careeriis self-interested learning: it is narrow in range and application: it does not liberalize the mind of the learner. -il The opposing camp, the vocational educational group, thoroughly believe that the so-called liberal education results in a loss to society and prevents the individual f1'OIU developing his best social self. They believe that any educgatioi. that does not prepare the individual to actually ,vcrt'c the comnnuiity in a definite, concrete way is a sterile education, and that the individual who gains such educa- tion which permits him to enjoy only certain phases of life is made a social parasite. Fortunately, all signs point to the fact that leaders in education are. in the main, slowly but surely pressing forward to a third position. namely, an acceptance of a form of education that shall liberalize the mind as well as intuse real social purpose and efficiency into the individual who shall confe under its intiuence. The education of the nurse has always been, and is today, vnarrowly voca- tional in conceptg if measured by the objectives set up by the National Educa- Clj Goodsell, Education of XVomen.'

Page 123 text:

Zf --?- SCQPEL -h- Friday, Beatrice, R. N., L'11i1'ersity Hospital, ixllll Arbor, Micl1. Fox, Maria11, R. N., Cniversity Hospital, .A1111 Arbor. Micl1. Funk, Mary, Bucyrus. Ohio Grierson, Lois, R. N.. Cniversity Hospital, .A1111 Arbor. Mich. Haist, Pearl, 713 li. Catherine St., .A1111 Ar- bor, Mich. Hanson, Eleanor, R. N., Grand Haven, Mich. Holrleman, Zola, R. N., 1544 S. Mai11 St.. Elkhart. 11111. Kallio, A1111a, R. N., Herman Keifer Hos- pital, T. B. Cnit, Detroit, Mich. Kellogg, 1Yi11ifrefl, R. N., University Hos- pital. Ann Arbor, Micl1. Kennedy, Kathryn, 902 E. Huron St., A1111 Arbor. Mich. Knapp, Marjorie. R. N., 349 Ohio St.. lien- ton Harbor, Mich. Knecht, Martha, R. N., 213 S. State St.. .A1111 Arbor, Mich. Kobe, Francis, R. N., University Hospital, .A1111 Arbor, Mich. Larson. Mamie, R. N., Marshall City, Hos- pital, Marshall, Micl1. l-e1111ur, Rachel, R. N., University Hospital. .A1111 Arbor, Micl1. Linn, Helen, R. N.. Cniversity Hospital, .A1111 Arbor, Mich. Macllonalcl, Olive, R. N., 215 N. Division St., Ann Arbor, Mich. McGa11', Jean, R. N., Ford Hospital, Detroit, VMicl1. McG11g'a11. Muriel. R. N., London. Ontario. Canada l?U.'!175Fd. Marsl1all, Dora. R. N., Cniversity Hospital. .A1111 Arbor, Mich. Mills, Ethyle, R. N.. 513 S, Division St., .A1111 Arbor, Mich. Morehouse, Frances. R. N.. .A1111 Arbor. Micl1. Morton, XYilla, R. N., A1111 Arbor, Mich. Myres, Phyllis, R. N., Bucyrus, Ohio Nelson, Anna, R. N., 234 Meclbury Ave., Detroit, Mich. Nelson, Katherine, R. N., Cniversity Hosf pital, .A1111 Arbor. Micl1. Nichol, Elma Nellie, R. N.. 210 S. Thayer St., .A1111 Arbor, Micl1. Paveyi Yivian, R. N., 21.3 S. State St., fxllll Arbor. Mich. Scharer, Gladys. R. 519 Linden St., A1111 Arbor, Mich. Schneicler. Margie. R. N.. Couzens Hall, .A1111 Arbor, Mich. Scholton, He11rietta. R. N., Couzens Hall, ,A1111 Arbor. Mich. Sherrick, Pearl. 519 Linde11 St., .A1111 Ar- bor, Micl1. Slough, Mary, 500 E. Catherine St.. A1111 Arbor. Micl1. Steffe, Dorothy. 712 E. XYasl1i11gton St.. .A1111 Arbor, Micl1. Sullivan. Dorothy. R. N., 712 E. Miashing- ton St., .A1111 Arbor. Micl1. Sweers, R. N., 712 E. XYasl1i11gto11 St., .A1111 Arbor, Mich. YX'e11g, Florence, R. N., Ciiiversity Hospital, ,A1111 Arbor, Micl1. XYillis. Cecile. R. N., 745 Cinyersity Ave.. .A1111 Arbor. Mich,

Page 125 text:

-I--SCKELPEL ii- tion Commision it would be found lamentably wanting. That such a condition of affairs should be so can easily be understood by an examination of the growth and development of nursing schools. The growth in the number of nursing schools in this country has been nothing short of phenomenal. There were some fifteen training schools in lSS5: today finds something like two thousand accredited nursing schools and a large number of unaccredited schools. This rapid growth tool: place primarily because the hospitals very early discovered the economic value of maintaining training school. Almost from the beginning, therefore, the nursing schools destiny has been guided by other than educators and, in nine times out of ten, the school was created only for the purpose of providing the hospital with the cheapest possible nursing service. Class rooms, instructors, libraries, equipment, etc., have only been secured by the never-ceasing and insistent demands of the women who courageously have struggled to win for their students those things which those in authority regarded as unnecessary but which any educator would probably laugh at because of its meagreness. Training rather than educating has been the narrow function of the hospital nursing school. Few hospital boards have any appreciation of the fact that their hospital has for years been failing the community in regard to one of its greatest needs. The average hospital board does not see that it is building women and citizens as well as nurses: that just in so far as they continue to manage the nursing school on the present narrow basis they are actually inflicting a great hardship on the community. lVhen the student graduates from the nursing school. the community expects to find in this graduate nurse not only a person who thoroughly under- stands the technique of her profession but one who is ethically and socially minded. In the past few years a storm of criticism has been leveled at the head of the nurse, not only by the physician but by the community at large. Everyone asks, Oh! where is the nurse of yester year? lYhat has happened to our nurse of yester year? etc. The medical profession as a whole has, to a great degree, claimed that the reason why the nurse has become less efficient, less satisfactory. amenable to command, etc., is because she has become over-educated. Thas such a statement can be made seriously is but an open admission of ignorance of all matters per- taining to education and educational problems. That the curriculum of the nursing schools needs an entire revamping or that methods of teaching nurses must be changed, cannot be denied. A very important fact that must be taken into consideration if the problem is to be approached in an intelligent manner lies in the age of the student nurse of today. The average age of the student entering the nursing school today is eighteen! that of the student in WOO. for example, twenty-live or more. The fact must be borne in mind also that society has changed greatly during these past twenty-seven years and, no doubt, if the entrance age now were Fixed at twenty-live we would not lind the same individual as stable a product at the age of twenty-tive today as she was at the same age twenty years ago. lt is distinctly essential that hospital boards, and all others interested in nursing education, should come to a keen realization that they are receiving girls, not women, into their schools today and that these girls must be surrounded by an entirely different environment and taught a different type of curriculum than the student nurse of twenty years ago or so.