Impact of the Great Depression and World War II on Higher Education in the U.S.

Kathi Roisen

Ball State University

EDAC 631

Dr. Bo Chang

Name: Commented On:

Kathi Roisen

1

Introduction

The period of the Great Depression up through the Second World War marked a tumultuous

time in American history that impacted every citizen. This paper will examine some of the

changes that occurred in higher education in the U.S. from the Depression through the war, and

then provide a brief look at post-war trends.

The Roaring Twenties, an era of great optimism and prosperity, in which the Dow-Jones

Stock Average doubled in only two years of trading from 1927 to 1929, gave way to

hopelessness and poverty as stability vanished almost overnight with the Wall Street crash on

October 29th, 1929. This triggered economic deterioration that led to mass unemployment,

bankruptcies, homelessness, hunger and despair. The very foundations of our economy were

shaken, as the worst economic downturn in history extended from the crash until the onset of the

war. Unemployment levels reached a peak of nearly 25% in 1933.

Year Population Labor

Force Unemployed

Percentage of

Labor Force

1929 88,010,000 49,440,000 1,550,000 3.14

1930 89,550,000 50,080,000 4,340,000 8.67

1931 90,710,000 50,680,000 8,020,000 15.82

1932 91,810,000 51,250,000 12,060,000 23.53

1933 92,950,000 51,840,000 12,830,000 24.75

1934 94,190,000 52,490,000 11,340,000 21.60

1935 95,460,000 53,140,000 10,610,000 19.97

1936 96,700,000 53,740,000 9,030,000 16.80

1937 97,870,000 54,320,000 7,700,000 14.18

1938 99,120,000 54,950,000 10,390,000 18.91

1939 100,360,000 55,600,000 9,480,000 17.05

1940 101,560,000 56,180,000 8,120,000 14.45

1941 102,700,000 57,530,000 5,560,000 9.66

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html

2

Throughout 1930 the GDP contracted by 9% and twenty-thousand businesses went bankrupt.

Industrial production was cut in half and exports declined dramatically. Those who did retain

employment were subjected to significant wage cuts, shortened work hours and deteriorating

working conditions. The government safety nets that we take for granted today like

unemployment insurance, welfare, Medicare and Medicaid did not exist, and charities were

stretched thin. Eleven stock market speculators took their own lives by noon on the day of the

crash and suicides grew with unemployment. Evictions and loss of homes lead to overcrowding,

especially in urban areas, which exacerbated discontent. Unemployment statistics during the

Great Depression clearly indicate an extensive and rapid collapse in the labor market where

recovery did not occur until the beginning of World War II, when industry needs for the wartime

effort stimulated the economy to prosperity. These changes impacted higher education directly.

Highlights and Influential Factors

During the Depression states cut higher education budgets drastically; in the 1930’s

allocations declined about 40% with the greatest losses manifesting in regions where the

manufacturing crisis was severest (upper Midwest). Private college endowments plummeted as

well. “The average decline in enrollment for all four-year institutions between 1929 and 1933

was 7.9%” (Hostetler, 1989). However, by 1940, in spite of catastrophic economic markers,

college attendance had dropped only marginally throughout the previous decade of the

Depression. Several factors helped higher education ride out what could have been a potentially

ruinous decline in enrollment. First, a swelling in the population of college aged youth prevented

a precipitous drop in overall enrollment. In addition, during the previous decade college had

come to be seen as rewarding, glamourous and prestigious. It also provided young people with a

delay of adult responsibilities. But perhaps of greatest significance was the fact that students and

3

the society at large came to believe that a college education would lead to remunerative

employment.

“Enrollment increases during the Depression suggests that widespread unemployment makes

college seem more attractive. While few families could afford to spend much on their children’s’

education during the Thirties, and many badly needed the extra income, their children could

seldom find jobs. Under those circumstances college evidently made sense to some who would

not have chosen it in the Twenties. In addition, the Depression very clearly illustrates advantages

of having a degree, for college graduates in bureaucratic, white-collar jobs suffered relatively

less than other sorts of workers.” (Jencks and Riesman p108).

The federal government, through Roosevelt’s New Deal, played a very significant role in

shaping educational opportunities during the Depression. With an eye toward shoring up the

economy while simultaneously offering training and education, agencies like the The National

Youth Administration (NYA) were implemented during the first term of Roosevelt’s

administration. The NYA operated from 1935 to 1943 as part of the Works Progress

Administration and provided work training based on U.S. citizenship and financial need for

youth between ages 16 and 25. In addition to offering courses in writing, reading, and arithmetic,

the NYA ran two programs: The Works Project Program to train unemployed, out-of-school

youth, and the Student Aid Program to provide work-study training for high school, college, and

graduate students. One of the unintended outcomes of the New Deal programs (which reemerged

later during testing of military recruits for the war) was the recognition of the wholly inadequate

state of education in America. Massive numbers of individuals were determined to be illiterate

and did not possess even the most fundamental job skills. This discovery required the focus of

these training programs to incorporate basic literacy instruction.

4

Interestingly, community colleges faced other issues during the Depression. In the state of

California, where the most extensive network of junior colleges existed, there was opposition to

these schools from certain classes of taxpaying entities (insurance companies, banks, utility

companies and the Chamber of Commerce) who protested that the state could not afford to

support the schools because there was “too much duplication in courses offered at universities,

teachers’ colleges and junior colleges.” (Gallagher 2001). Tension persisted between those who

felt that funding community colleges came at the expense of the far more prestigious University

of California. The State Chamber of Commerce Taxpayers Association wrote a letter to the

President of the University of California, Robert Sproul, imploring him to join their efforts to

deprive the junior colleges of funding. Sproul however, was not on the side of big business, and

went out of his way to praise community colleges. He was cognizant of the fact that 65% of all

the junior college transfers to UC graduated, and that a significant percentage of Phi Beta Kappa

students were junior college transfers. Eventually, with the support of New Deal Democrats,

labor leaders, progressives and civic organizations, the junior colleges were protected. At the

same time, the junior colleges met other critical community needs for technical and vocational

training at low cost. Junior colleges blossomed from 1920 to 1930, growing from 52 to 277

nationwide. By 1940 one tenth of all college students in the U.S. was enrolled in junior college.

The war’s impact on education was extensive, as national resources were diverted toward the

Allied effort and away from education and social programs. Institutions of higher education

received the brunt of the war’s repercussions (as opposed to K-12). Both private and public

colleges and universities were experiencing financial stress. “State institutions appealed to

legislatures for additional funding to offset inflation, but with declining enrollment of civilian

5

students, institutions did not have a strong case and legislatures were not inclined to increase

appropriations.” (Cardozier, 1993).

School budgets were slashed as both instructors and students left classrooms to enlist. By 1944

only 65% of the pre-war teaching force was still teaching. Youth felt unsure whether their

patriotic duty required them to enlist voluntarily or continue in programs of study until they were

called. President Roosevelt made his position very clear on this matter in a letter to the

Washington Post in August 1940:

“Reports have reached me that some young people who have planned to enter college this fall, as

well as a number of those who attended college last year, are intending to interrupt their educa-

tion at this time because they feel that it is more patriotic to work in a shipyard or to enlist in the

Army or Navy, than it is to attend college. Such a decision would be unfortunate. We must have

well-educated and intelligent citizens who have sound judgment in dealing with the difficult

problems of today. We must also have scientists, engineers, economists and other people with

specialized knowledge to plan and to build for national defense as for social and economic

progress. Young people should be advised that it is their patriotic duty to continue the normal

course of their education unless and until they are called so that they will be well prepared for

greatest usefulness to their country.”

Nevertheless, the primary concern for post-secondary institutions became simply staying afloat.

Although higher education institutions’ incomes fell, their ability to generate revenue would

have been considerably worse had it not been for the specialized training and research needs of

the federal government. There was an infusion of capital for colleges and universities that staved

off more extreme financial difficulty through college training programs run by the Army, Air

Force and Navy. (ASTP Army Specialized Training Program, AAFTP Army Air Force Training

6

Program, V-12 Navy College Training Program). These military programs were designed to

meet wartime demand for soldiers and junior officers with technical skills. More than 220

American universities participated, offering accelerated courses in science, medicine,

engineering, dentistry, foreign language and psychology. Many universities modified research

labs to meet military objectives. Scientists in academia assisted in the development of

sophisticated weaponry, professors with expertise in geography, foreign languages, history and

other relevant areas worked to aid the government. Universities cooperated with industry to meet

the exigencies of military weapons research, and to compensate for shortages through the

production of synthetic rubber. The government tapped scientific community expertise to

advance aeronautics, radar, the development of combat simulators for training, new electronic

processes, optics and much more. Wartime needs and attitudinal shifts in general, contributed to

shifting curricular focus away from humanities/liberal arts to applied sciences and other more

pragmatic fields.

As young men continued to enlist during the war years, they were required to pass academic

tests. Millions took the Army General Classification Test (AGCT). The AGCT was the primary

exam used by the Army to categorize recruits. The test assessed the recruit in what were

perceived at the time as “native endowments” and the combined effects of schooling and social

exposure, in an effort to determine his intelligence. The test results would determine if the recruit

was inducted into the army, tested further or ultimately rejected. The results could also determine

if the recruit was accepted into more desirable specialized training, like pilot training or the

newly minted ASTP. The ASTP was designed to supply the army with highly trained specialists

and technicians by sending qualified recruits for additional college coursework in engineering,

foreign language, medical, veterinary and dental studies.

7

Another reason for further testing was to determine if the recruit was illiterate, but of sufficient

intelligence to be of use to the army with further remedial training. Literacy was defined as the

ability to read and understand English at a fourth-grade level. Intelligence was defined as the

ability to learn military duties within a year). The data that illuminated the extent of illiteracy

supported the efforts of adult education advocates. In 1942 the GED was developed to give

members of the military an opportunity to use their experiences in the service to qualify for a

high school equivalency certificate. This paved the way for access to GI bill benefits after the

war. Like the training offered by New Deal programs which uncovered the extent of illiteracy

among young adults, the military screening during the war revealed similar shortcomings, and

many potential enlistees failed the exams. There were likely varied reasons for this including the

fact that there was no formal high school curriculum tailored to defense oriented subjects, many

service members came from extreme poverty and poor schools, and they were just shaking off

the detritus of the Great Depression, which hit schools, teachers and students very hard.

(Kennett). It is beyond the scope of this paper to examine in detail how the use of these tests by

the military may have had further impact on educational policies and curricula.

But, with rapid advances in technology, World War II demanded men with complex skills to

operate and repair the weapons of war. (Palmer, Wiley et al.) The skills essential to excel on the

battlefield required a level of knowledge and literacy not previously seen in warfare. Universities

such as Baylor, in Waco Texas, modified curricular offerings starting in 1942 as a direct result of

the attacks on Pearl harbor and the U.S. declaration of war. Baylor was one of the schools that

implemented the ASTP and Navy V-12 programs and offered Dept. of Defense courses for

faculty and staff. Other modifications to the undergraduate curricular offerings took place under

the umbrella of a program called ESMWT (Engineering, Science, Management, War Training).

8

Although the impact of World War II on the higher education sector manifested with initial

abrupt drops in enrollment producing significant financial impact, as new funds became

available (because colleges and universities could contribute to the war effort), and military

training units emerged at most colleges and universities, these institutions stayed solvent.

Toward the end of the war the Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of 1944, more commonly

known as the GI Bill, was approved. It was considered the single most far reaching piece of

legislation (economically, socially and politically) ever enacted by the federal government, and a

vehicle for democratizing education making college a viable option for millions of returning

veterans. From 1944 to 1956 when the original bill ended, nearly 8 million veterans participated

in education or training programs. The bill also provided low-interest mortgages for homes,

businesses or farms. In hindsight, we can see how prescient it was of the Roosevelt

administration to plan for the reintegration of millions through this legislation. With the return

of veterans and the necessity of managing the tremendous transition from war to a peacetime

economy, many feared that a depression would follow after World War 2, as it had after World

War 1. In light of the fact that the economy had been completely refashioned from top to bottom

to manufacture arms, women had entered the workforce in record numbers, and adapting to

technological change would require entirely new and rigorous skill sets, the opportunity to attend

college free of charge (as well as receive monthly living allowances) paved the way for

successful reintegration and economic success. At the same time, there was resistance to this

plan. Those who felt a college education was a bastion of the elite did not embrace the notion of

millions of veterans entering institutions of higher learning. This sentiment was epitomized by

the president of the University of Chicago, Robert Hutchens who said: “Colleges and universities

will find themselves converted into educational hobo jungles…education is not a device for

9

coping with mass unemployment”. Hutchens turned out to be on the wrong side of history, and

did not anticipate the extraordinary success of the G.I. bill. Certainly, the bill served as a

mechanism to prevent unemployment of veterans after the war. But it also laid the foundation

for broadening participation in higher education (Cardozier), increased income of college

graduates which in turn stimulated the economy and generated tax revenues. And, for most

colleges and universities, revenues from the GI Bill meant reliable income and enrollment for

years to come.

Implications

The educational deficits among average Americans that became glaring during the Depression

and World War II, emphasized the need for significant improvements in our educational systems.

The Depression and the War were great societal levelers. Virtually all Americans suffered and

sacrificed through the turmoil of those decades. However, as is often the case with grand

catastrophic events, the country emerged from the war with a strengthened commitment to

prioritize a more educated populace, and the government harnessed the financial and political

capacity to do so. With a plethora of post-war opportunities, the United States entered a period of

tremendous growth and optimism as public higher education became accessible, affordable and

the foundation for upward mobility.

10

Area Summary

Background Depression leads to less public support for

public education, declining enrollments.

World War 2 drains higher education

establishments of both students and

instructors. Academic deficits of young

Americans become glaring and worrisome.

Highlights New Deal Programs serve and educate

millions of young people and stimulate the

economy. Military training programs sustain

institutions of higher education during the war

and redirect educational emphases toward

STEM fields.

Influential Factors Rise of junior college movement, military

collaboration with higher education, G.I. bill

allows millions to attend college post-war

Implications Flexibility of educational institutions during

periods of unrest, war, economic collapse is

essential to their survival. However, without

government assistance and collaborative

efforts, only the most forward- thinking

institutions would be likely to thrive. The

U.S. frequently tends to be reactive rather

than proactive with respect to educational

advances (exception, G.I. Bill) which puts us

in the untenable position of trying to dig out

of a hole. Even the reaction to Sputnik in

1957 illustrates this. A college education has

now become essential for advancement in the

U.S., it is not a luxury or relegated to the

domain of the elite.

11

References

1) Cardozier, V. Colleges and Universities in World War II. (1993). Ch 9. Praeger

Publishers, Westport, Ct.

2) Education, Classification and Military Strength retrieved from

https://history.army.mil/events/ahts2015/presentations/seminar6/sem6_MarkFry_text_Im

pactOfEdLevels.pdf)

3) El-Khawas, E. (2011). The Impact of Economic Crises on American Universities:

Lessons from the Past. Higher Education Management and Policy V23 n2 Article 8

4) Gallagher, E. A. (2001). Protecting and Strengthening the Dream: California Junior

Colleges During the Great Depression. Michigan Academician 33, 231-242.

5) Hostetler, J. M. Effects of the Great Depression on Private Higher Education

Dissertation Western Michigan University 1989

6) Jencks, C., Riesman, D. (1968). The Academic Revolution Doubleday

7) Hutchens, R. (1944). Colliers Weekly Retrieved from http://unz.org/Pub/Colliers-

1944dec30-00020

8) Kennett, L. (1997). GI: The American Soldier in World War 2. Scribner

9) Palmer, R. R, Wiley, B. I., Keast, W. R.

The Ground Forces: The Procurement and Training of Ground Combat Troops, United

States Army in World War II.

(Washington: Center of Military History, United States Army, 1991): 2

10) http://blogs.baylor.edu/hesabaylorhistoryproject/sarah-madsen/

https://history.army.mil/events/ahts2015/presentations/seminar6/sem6_MarkFry_text_ImpactOfEdLevels.pdfhttps://history.army.mil/events/ahts2015/presentations/seminar6/sem6_MarkFry_text_ImpactOfEdLevels.pdfhttp://unz.org/Pub/Colliers-1944dec30-00020http://unz.org/Pub/Colliers-1944dec30-00020http://blogs.baylor.edu/hesabaylorhistoryproject/sarah-madsen/

12

11) Schrecker, E. (2009). The Bad Old Days: How higher education fared during the Great

Depression. The Chronicle of Higher Education

12) Tapia Granados, J.A., Diez Roux, A.V. Life and death during the Great Depression

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/41/17290 2009 Oct 13; 106(41): 17290–17295.

13) Unemployment graph page 1 http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html

14) Woolner, D. B. The New Deal’s Unintended Impact on Education. (2010) The Roosevelt

Institute

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html