The Enigmatic Profession

The Enigmatic Profession

Nina Roofe

University of Central Arkansas

Abstract

The field of family and consumer sciences originated in the area of domestic science. The field evolved in great part due to the need to improve living conditions resulting from the social, economic, and public health issues that arose during the Industrial Revolution. From Ellen Richards initiating the Lake Placid Conferences to the work of Brown and Paolucci in formulating a definition of home economics to today, our field of study has struggled with identity and public recognition. This paper explores the philosophical foundations, the influence of historical and current events, and the future of the discipline.

Introduction

One definition of “enigma” is “something hard to understand or explain” (Merriam-Webster, 2009). Persons practicing in the field of family and consumer sciences know who they are and what they do, but communicating this purpose to those outside of the field has proven challenging. The field of family and consumer sciences has a rich history grounded in science, which should garner the respect of other science-based professions. Yet, our colleagues are often unaware of our contributions to science and to society. The work of this field is most evident in times of economic or resource scarcity, for example the rationing of food after World War I or the loss of income during the Great Depression. Yet, most Americans cannot verbalize or identify the work of a family and consumer scientist.

Early Pioneers

The early beginnings of the field of family and consumer sciences were in what Catharine Beecher championed as “Victorian domesticity” and focused on the development of domestic science. Her early writings, first published in 1841, Treatise on Domestic Economy, focused on the homemaker and management of her home. Her later writings reflected the movement to view domestic science as a profession with a focus on teacher education (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Fifty-two years later Ellen Richards hosted the first Lake Placid Conference to usher in the birth of a new national organization with an innovative focus. The early pioneers of the field of family and consumer sciences dedicated their lives to the study and the practice of improving the quality of life for people. The need to improve living conditions resulted from the social, economic, and public health issues that arose during the Industrial Revolution.

The practice of home economics in the nineteenth century as an organization for social reform and as a career path for women reflects the early work of pioneers like Ellen Richards, Catherine Beecher, Caroline Hunt, and many others. Issues of gender and race affected access to education and employment while early legislation laid the foundation to open the doors of higher education to women. Known as the founder of home economics, Ellen Richards was a strong proponent of science and education. In 1873, Ellen Richards earned both a Bachelor of Science degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in chemistry, and a Master’s degree from Vassar (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

During these years, we see evidence of Ellen Richards’ roots in chemistry through her work in water and soil science, nutrition, public health, and sanitation. Chemistry is the vehicle through which she studied and developed processes to improve social conditions. She focused on improving environmental conditions such as air and water quality, ventilation, and sanitation. Ellen also promoted education in areas such as nutrition and scientific housekeeping as a means to alleviate poor living conditions (Hunt, 1958).

Ellen Richards is described as having the ability to “cut off fruitless debate without injuring anyone’s feelings, and could bring out all of the value that the members had to contribute and at the same time suppress all that was irrelevant” (Hunt, 1958). She fits the description of a transformational leader. As Ellen Richards took over the leadership of the new American Home Economics Association, we see her “challenging the process, inspiring a shared vision, enabling others to act, modeling the way, and encouraging the heart” (Kouzes & Posner, 1987). She challenged sanitation processes, inspired students to share her vision of women as professionals, enabled other women to receive education and training, used her home as a model of efficiency and organization, and encouraged correspondence students. She leaves a legacy of caring for others, educating everyone she contacted, and making the world a better place one home at a time. (Welcher, Hansen, Marx & Paulson, 2003; Stage & Vincenti, 1997; Hunt, 1958).

The origin of the discipline we know today is evident in the work of many inspiring leaders. Catherine Beecher was instrumental in the education of women through her work at the Hartford Female Seminary. She promoted a science-based curriculum to prepare women for professional employment as well as for management of their homes. Marion Talbot was a student of Ellen Richards and a teacher at Richards’ School of Housekeeping. Talbot went on to the University of Chicago where she held the position of Dean of Women. She promoted the home as an instrument of social and political change by stating that the “obligations of home life are not by any means limited to its own four walls . . . “ (Stage & Vincenti, 1997, p. 28). This idea of social activism promoted by the AHEA reflected the goals of Talbot and other early leaders to improve standards of living (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Caroline Hunt, well known as the author of The Life of Ellen H. Richards, and Revaluations, was instrumental in data collection for an immigration and ethnicity study conducted in Chicago in the late 1890s. She planned and implemented a home economics program at the University of Wisconsin in 1903, and later worked with Wilbur Atwater in nutrition research (East, 1982).

The history of the profession reveals many examples of home economics professionals providing substantive and creative approaches to solving problems. Flora Rose served as the director of the College of Home Economics at Cornell. She was instrumental in the provision of nutrition education by Cooperative Extension Service specialists to help families meet their nutrition needs on relief allotments during the Great Depression. Using her menus, a family of five could eat nutritiously for less than five dollars a week. Lucy Maltby also responded to the issue of scarce resources by creating recipes based on postwar ingredient availability. Her work in engineering and design at Corning Glass Works resulted in solutions to practical problems faced by women in their kitchens on a daily basis. Lucy’s work on Pyrex products addressed product design, recipe standardization and testing, and new product development (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

Another example of home economics professionals working in a business setting is Mary Engle Pennington and the National Association of Ice Industries. Her goal was to improve refrigeration for consumers and address gender stereotypes. She trained home service workers, developed a grading scale for refrigerators, and later worked for the American Poultry Industries. Dora Boston and Marion Paul are inspiring examples of African American women striving to improve conditions for families through their work as extension agents in South Carolina. These women faced the challenges of dire economic times as well as segregation and racial discrimination. These are just a few examples of the work of early pioneers. Their time in history is marked by urbanization, industrial progress, immigration issues, war, social and economic inequality, and health concerns. Their collective mission was to initiate social change to improve living conditions for individuals, families, and communities. They initiated this change by promoting science as the basis for action, education as a platform to emancipate women, and the home as a place to raise the standard of living and enact social change (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

Legislative Influences

In 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the first Morrill Act into law, which provided federal land to the states for building colleges of agriculture. The original goal of the land-grant colleges was to provide practical education for boys. The idea that girls could benefit from education in domestic skills gained support a few years later. Land-grant colleges and universities provided education in many areas including agriculture and home economics (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Today, the mission of the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC), now Association of Public and Land-grant Universities—APLU, is to “support high-quality public higher education and its member institutions as they perform their traditional teaching, research, and public service roles” (West Virginia University Extension Service, 2009, p.7 ). The Hatch Act of 1887 provided federal money for states to establish agricultural experiment stations to help farmers upgrade their agricultural methods. The first Morrill Act passed during segregation, so people of African American or other minority descent could not attend these colleges or universities. The second Morrill Act, signed into law by President Benjamin Harrison in 1890, provided funding for historically black land-grant colleges. This act required states to distribute federal funding to create institutions of higher learning open to African Americans and other minority races (Stage & Vincenti, 1997). Appendix A contains a brief chronology of these and other notable events.

Societal and Environmental Influences

The progress of the Industrial Revolution brought to the forefront issues like social and economic inequality and health concerns (Chambers, 2000). The Industrial Era ushered in mechanization in many areas including textiles and agriculture. Factories became more efficient with the development of assembly lines and utilization of immigrant and child workers. The use of other forms of energy, like steam, expanded improvements to roads and railways and improved transportation. Obvious divisions between the rich and the poor were evident in living conditions and diseases associated with these living conditions. The development of labor unions began in the Industrial Era and strengthened in the Progressive Era.

The Progressive Era brought reform in many areas including gender, class, and race. World War I began in 1914, removing men from families and the workplace. This created an immediate need for women to receive training and opportunity for work outside the home as well as the need for childcare. The social work and the public administration professions expanded in response to growing social needs of safe housing, equitable pay, and child advocacy. Laws enacted in the areas of prohibition, child labor, and labor unions reflect the needs of people during this time in history. The effects of industrialization, immigration, and urbanization are strong forces in the Industrial and Progressive Eras. The early pioneers of the family and consumer sciences (FCS) profession focused their efforts on these issues (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

Lake Placid Conferences

The Lake Placid Conferences conducted from 1899 to 1908 mostly in Lake Placid, New York, addressed a variety of topics including the name of the profession, public awareness, natural sciences, educational curriculum, and the creation of a national organization. The first Lake Placid Conference held at the mountain retreat of Mr. and Mrs. Melville Dewey included eleven people. Those in attendance were on the forefront of a social movement, which would affect the lives of people for decades to come (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

The attendees at the first conference dealt with strategies to improve daily life for families in their homes. This is reflective of the social and economic struggles common to families at this time in history, including low wages, poor working conditions, and lack of training and education for the majority of the American public. The topic of education comprised ten of the fifteen topics at the first conference. The education of women as agents of social change in their homes and for future careers was a primary focus of the early pioneers of the field.

They also struggled with selecting a name for the field of study. Ellen Richards would continue to struggle with the issue of name for years to come. She promoted “oekology” as the “science of right living” in the 1880s and “euthenics” as the science of controllable environment at the 1904 Lake Placid Conference. Ellen Richards supported “domestic science” at the first Conference and strove to develop a professional field for women. The group decided on “home economics” to denote this new field of study (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

The second conference, held in 1900 expanded to thirty members, and membership grew over the years. Topics of discussion varied each year and included education and curriculum, public awareness, application of science to the home, and international efforts. This definition of home economics emerged from the fourth Lake Placid Conference (1902):

Home economics in its most comprehensive sense is the study of the laws, conditions, principles, and ideals which are concerned on the one hand with man’s immediate physical environment and on the other with his nature as a social being, and is the study of the relation between these two factors.

By this time, the National Household Economics Association dissolved due to the thought that the Lake Placid group was accomplishing the same work in a better fashion. Establishing a new national organization began at the tenth conference in 1908 in Chautauqua, New York. The formation of this new organization included the development of home economics groups in each state, dues payment by members, the publication of a professional journal, and a new name. The American Home Economics Association (AHEA) was established in 1909, an accomplishment of the tenth Lake Placid Conference (Stage & Vincenti, 1997).

These yearly conferences provided a forum for leaders in the field to share ideas, develop a mission and creed, and enact a plan of social action. Appendix B provides a brief chronology of the Lake Placid Conferences. The evolution of the Lake Placid Conferences from deciding on a name in 1899 to forming a national organization is 1908 is interesting and prescient in that the profession continues to struggle with the issues of name recognition and public awareness today (Haley, Peggram, & Ley, 1993).

Philosophical Foundations

Critical science, ecosystems theory, and practical reasoning entwine throughout the history of the profession. Specific applications of these foundations have changed in response to current need, but these foundational principles are still evident in the current structure of family and consumer sciences. These principles also frame the future of the profession.

Critical Science

Ellen Richards had the ability to see what was and what could or should be in order to improve conditions. Applying science to solving problems encountered in day-to-day living was her social mission. In the area of education, she recognized the need to develop curriculum to prepare women for professional employment. The sense of social mission inherent in this field of study is reflected in the goal set forth by the AHEA in 1909, “the improvement of living conditions in the home, the institutional household and the community” (Announcement: AHEA, 1909, p. 1). Critical science is the process used to examine a situation and develop strategies for improvement. This concept is evident in the mission statement for home economics developed by Brown and Paolucci (1979, p. 23),

The mission of home economics is to enable families, both as individual units and generally as a social institution, to build and maintain systems of action which lead (1) to maturing in individual self-formation and (2) to enlightened, cooperative participation in the critique and formulation of social goals and means for accomplishing them.

Critical science requires a focus on what the profession should be doing, which involves constant self-evaluation (Gentzler, 1999). Marjorie Brown encouraged the use of critical science as a part of critical theory to critique past work and guide decisions about future work in her Commemorative Lecture to the American Home Economics Association Annual Meeting (Brown, 1984). Today, FCS professionals use critical science to improve practice in a variety of ways. We use critical science to think beyond the immediate effects of a solution to question underlying beliefs, values, and assumptions. Engaging in intellectual discussions on various topics is valuable to recognize another point of view or unintended consequences, develop logical reasoning skills, and improve presentation skills (Vincenti, Smith, & Fabian, 2004).

Eco-Systems Theory

The interactive nature of relationships between and among individuals, families, and communities with their environment is the basis of eco-system theory (Nickols, 2003). We see the ecosystems theory in the mission statement developed at the fourth Lake Placid Conference (1902) and in the mission by Brown & Paolucci (1979). Most recently, the ecosystems theory is evident in the “interrelationships, synergy, and interaction” of core concepts of the body of knowledge model for family and consumer sciences. The core concepts include “basic human needs, individual well-being, family strengths, and community vitality.” This model emphasizes the interactive nature of families with their micro- and macro-environments. One example is family purchasing decisions. Families make changes in their purchasing habits based on their income, goals, and priorities. These decisions in turn affect the local and global economy. Anywhere individual, family, and community systems intersect represent an opportunity for intervention (Nickols, Ralston, Anderson, Browne, Schroeder, Thomas, Wild, 2009, p. 271 ). The field of FCS is well suited to eco-systems theory. This field encompasses a wide variety of specializations and work settings, which interact with the environment as well as with individuals, families, and communities (Vincenti, Smith, & Fabian, 2004).