User:Aahammer99

HOMEMAKING IN THE US EDUCATION SYSTEM

Over the years, homemaking in the United States has been a foundational piece of the education system, particularly for women. These homemaking courses, called home economics, have had a prevalent presence in secondary and higher education since the 19th century. By definition, home economics is “the art and science of home management”, meaning that the discipline incorporates both creative and technical aspects into its teachings. Home economics courses often consist of learning how to cook, how to do taxes, and how to perform child care tasks. In the United States, home economics courses have been a key part of learning the art of taking care of a household.

19th Century

Since the 19th century, schools have been incorporating home economics courses into their education programs. In the United States, the teaching of home economics courses in higher education greatly increased with the Morrill Act of 1862. Signed by Abraham Lincoln, the Morrill Act of 1862 granted land to each state or territory in America for higher educational programs in vocational arts, specifically mechanical arts, agriculture, and home economics. Such land grants allowed for people of a wider array of social classes to receive better education in important trade skills.

Home economics courses mainly taught students how to cook, sew, garden, and take care of children. The vast majority of these programs were dominated by women. Home economics allowed for women to receive a better education while also preparing them for a life of settling down, doing the chores, and taking care of the children while their husbands became the breadwinners. At this time, homemaking was only accessible to middle and upper class white women whose families could afford secondary schooling.

20th Century

Home economics in the United States education system increased in popularity in the early 20th century. From 1900 to 1917, more than thirty bills discussed in Congress dealt with issues of American vocational education and, by association, home economics. Americans wanted more opportunities for their young people to learn vocational skills and to learn valuable home and life skills. However, home economics was still dominated by women and women had little access to other vocational trainings. As stated by the National Education Association (NEA) on the distribution of males and females in vocations, “one-third of our menfolk are in agriculture, and one-third in non-agricultural productive areas; while two-thirds of our women are in the vocation of homemaking”. There was a great need across the United States to continue improving the vocational and homemaking education systems because demand for work was apparent after World War I and II. Therefore, in 1917, women's groups, political parties, and labor coalitions worked together in order to pass the Smith-Hughes Act. The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 created federal funds for "vocational education agriculture, trades and industry, and homemaking". With this funding, the United States was able to create more homemaking educational courses all across the country.

Throughout the latter part of 20th century, home economics courses became more inclusive. In 1963, Congress passed the Vocational Education Act, which granted even more funds to vocational education job training. Home economics courses started being taught across the nation to both boys and girls by way of the rise of second-wave feminism. This movement pushed for gender equality, leading to equality of education. In 1970, the course became required for both men and women. Starting in 1994, home economics courses in the United States began being referred to as "family and consumer science" in order to make the class appear more inclusive. With desegregation and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, men and women of all backgrounds could equally how to sew, cook, and balance a checkbook.

21st Century

       Present day, the prevalence of home economics courses has declined. Instead, schools are focusing more on courses that prepare one for university rather than life skills. Also, homemaking and home economics courses have developed a negative connotation because of the negative gender bias associated with home economics courses. Despite this, homemaking is now socially acceptable for both men and women to partake in. In the United States, both men and women are expected to take care of the home, the children, and the finances. More women are pursuing higher education rather than homemaking. In 2016, 56.4% of college students were female as opposed to 34.5% in 1956. Some schools are starting incorporate life skill courses back into their curriculum, but as a whole, home economics courses have been in major decline in the past century.

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hayes, W.M. Agriculture, industries, and home economics in our public schools. Address

delivered before the Department of Superintendents. Chicago: University of Chicago.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ504569.pdf

This was a speech given in 1908 at an education convention put on by the NEA, the National Education Association. This speech talks about the move in higher education towards incorporating more vocational learning for men and women. For men, a majority were learning agriculture or mechanical arts. For women, a vast majority were learning homemaking. This source is authoritative in this context because it details the rise in the education and practice of homemaking in the late 19th and early 20th centuries from the perspective of a respected speaker at an education conference. I will be using a quote from the speech detailing the percentage of men and women participating in these vocational studies. This source is biased in favor of the good nature of vocational acts because it is a speech given at an education conference promoting this type of education. Therefore, the speech could not fully represent the downsides of incorporating more vocational training for men and women.