The School of General Studies is one school in a corporate group which constitutes the main part of Columbia University. Other parts of this Corporation are Columbia College, the non-professional Graduate Faculties, and the College of Physicians and Surgeons. The School itself has many divisions; for example, departments of Physics, Mathematics, History and other customary academic disciplines, in all, about forty in number. They arranged in the academic year 1955-56 over 1,400 courses, seminars and laboratory sections. In addition, the School had its own representatives in a few non-teaching units of the University, such as the Office of University Admissions and the Office of the Registrar.

The basic units of organization in the Columbia Corporation are departments. Each academic department is represented in one, or more commonly, in several faculties or schools. For example, the Department of History – that is, all those who teach history – has enclaves in the Graduate School, in Columbia College, and in the School of General Studies.

As in other universities, the top administrator of a department is called "Chairman" (sometimes "Executive Officer") and the top administrator of a faculty or school is usually called "Dean". The University as a whole is headed by a President and a Board of Trustees. More peculiar to Columbia University is the "Departmental Representative", who is the top administrator of that section of a department which falls within a given faculty. Thus, the Department of Public Law and Government has departmental representatives in the Graduate Faculties, a Columbia College and in the School of General Studies. A simplified picture of the unit organization is presented in Chart 1.

From this organizational sketch it is plain that the School of General Studies is not a completely self-contained organization. It is one unit of the University and related with other units of the University. Like these other units, it is responsible to the Trustees and the President of the University. Moreover, it acts through departments which represent other colleges and schools as well. Yet the School of General Studies differs significantly from other parts of Columbia University, and what we will say about the School is not necessarily true of other units of Columbia University.

Let us now turn to the students, the teachers, and the administrators of the School of General Studies and describe their place within the School.

There are many things a college student is supposed to do. Most of them have to do with the achievement of knowledge. He is expected to attend classes, do assignments, write papers, use the library, do some laboratory experiments, take examinations at the end of each semester, and some times also during the semester. As a part of the required 1600 hours or thereabouts of classroom work, the candidate for a Bachelor’s degree in the School of General Studies must show a proficiency corresponding to 240 hours of instruction (six semesters) in a foreign language, 80-100 hours of mathematics or physics or chemistry (including laboratory work), 80-100 hours of botany, biology, or geology (including laboratory work), 80 hours of history or philosophy or a social science, 160 hours of English literature and composition, 50 hours of music history and music appreciation, 40 hours of art history and art appreciation, and, most important, at least 400 hours in a chosen field of concentration, his "major". In order to graduate, he must also pass a comprehensive examination in the major subject.

Some of the expectations the School holds up to the students have more to do with the acquisition of taste than of knowledge. We mentioned before that a college student is expected to write and speak in a clear, refined way, and to be able to judge the beautiful from the ugly in art, dress, and style of life. The required courses in English literature and composition, in art and in music, play an important role here. The School of General Studies differs markedly from the ordinary undergraduate schools in regard to some other conventional expectations that have to do with behavior and morality. The student in the Anglo-Saxon tradition is expected to be a "good sport", to respect the rules of the game and to take his losses or failures in stride. To this end, the typical American college student is supposed to participate in sports or club activities, make friends and show himself a worthy friend, be a pleasant date and develop not only social skills but character as well. The School of General Studies does not actively concern itself with this aspect of undergraduate education. The Dean of the School has made clear that this is a deliberate omission:

We are not dedicated to the development of "the whole man." We are prepared to assure that with the older, part-time student, such personality development, if it has not already occurred, must, of necessity, be taking place elsewhere. Our students have families, jobs, and other outside interests that sufficiently tax their time and energy. 12)

Thus, the School of General Studies sponsors no athletic teams, no fraternities and sororities, and recognizes only a few clubs and other typical accoutrements of the traditional undergraduate college.

Of significance also is the fact that the students are required to contribute substantially to the economy of the university. At the time of this study, the fees for a complete sequence of courses leading to a Bachelor’s degree totaled about $3,200.00. At Columbia University, as a whole, student fees pay for about half of the operating costs of the University. In the School of General Studies the students pay for the entire cost of the operation of the School and make a surplus for the larger university. In the academic year 1956-57 the School had an income of $3,422,999 and expenditures of $1,564,977, thus making a net income for the university of $1,858.022.13)  Moreover, the number of students receiving some financial aid from fellowships and scholarships is small in the School of General Studies. Only 6.5 per cent of the matriculated students and 3.1 per cent of the non-matriculated received such aid in 1956-57. The average for all divisions of Columbia University is 18. 0 per cent. 14)

A most important and almost unique variation in the School of General Studies from what is normally expected of college students has already been mentioned but should be discussed further. One prescription, usually a lenient one, that is normally applied to those who are called college students, requires that they be of a certain, rather closely defined age. American society has defined a certain age interval as "college age". It falls somewhere between adolescence and adulthood. College boys and girls are no longer adolescents nor are they yet adults. American society appears to treat this age and educational category as a separate entity: for example, it is as usual for a department store to have a "college shop" as it is to have a section for expectant mothers. In concrete terms, this social definition of college age in the United States starts somewhere around the ages of 17 or 18 and ends at 21 or 22, with an allowance for veterans to be somewhat older. This age requirement is reflected in people’s decisions to go to college. Few older persons apply. It is also reflected in the decisions of admission officers of colleges. In formal or informal ways, they generally discourage enrollment of older applicants.

The college we are studying, the School of General Studies at Columbia University, has one outstanding characteristic: it has dropped the requirement of usual college age for its students. In fact – in order not to compete with the established undergraduate divisions of Columbia University, Columbia College (for boys) and Barnard College (for girls) – it has imposed an age restriction in reverse. Admission to candidacy for a degree is, with some exceptions, limited to persons of twenty years of age or older. It will be a major theme of this study that the removal of the usual age restriction has had a large number foreseen and unforeseen consequences that have had profound effects the internal organization of the school.

Admission to the School is normally granted on the basis of a high school diploma presented by a student with above average grades in a pre-college sequence of high school courses. In his decision about admitting students, the admission officer is aided by the score on a scholastic aptitude test and a personal interview. Students who have not completed high school, but who show exceptional promise in their test scores may be admitted to certain basic courses, and thus participate in the so-called "validation program." If they pass these courses with grades equal to or better than those of the average student, they are admitted to further study at the School. Also, in the case of students with high school diplomas, the admission office is free to exercise – and usually does – the option of admitting a student as "non-matriculated" for his first five to ten courses. If he can maintain a B or B-average in these courses, he is transferred to "matriculated" status, that is, the School accepts him as a candidate for a degree. The picture is confused, however, by the fact that persons who take only one or two courses a semester are permitted to register without screening by any admission officer, provided they have graduated from high school. (This practice has been criticized as an extraneous element surviving from the past University Extension.15))  A further complexity in the situation is furnished by the fact that many non-matriculated students already hold Bachelor’s degrees and attend the School only to acquire supplementary education. Many in the latter category have made belated shifts in their career plans and thus return to college to fulfill requirements for their new professional schools. All these students work side by side in the classrooms, laboratories and libraries, and are held to the same assignments and examinations.

As might be expected, the normal undergraduate ranking system based on full time study and a relatively homogeneous student body is inapplicable to the School of General Studies. Thus the ranks of freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior, each corresponding to one year of the regular four year college sequence, are rarely used. Nevertheless, there are informal rank differences in the student body, and these are usually also recognized by the University. One can distinguish five categories judged in terms of achieved or anticipated competence:

1. Extension students.
   These are non-matriculated students who hold no college degree and are not interested in getting one. They are usually prohibited from taking more than three courses a semester, and most of them take only one. To cite one voice among them:
   
   Every year of our marriage, my husband and I have spent one night a week going to lectures. It takes us away from the ordinary. We usually go to the New School (for Social Research) or NYU (New York University) because this is more convenient where we live. But this year we will try Columbia.
   
   They will probably find their new course in art history somewhat more difficult than their past 'lectures’, and they will have to take an examination at the end of the course. Nevertheless, they represent 22 per cent of the student body in the School of General Studies.
2. Validation students.
   These are non-matriculated students without a high school diploma who aspire to get a Bachelor’s degree. They are a very small group; only one percent of the students.
3. Non-matriculated degree students.
   These are students who have applied or plan to apply for a degree from the School, but whose candidacy for a degree has not yet been approved by the School. They constitute 22 per cent of the student body.
4. Matriculated students.
   These students have qualified as full-fledged candidates for study toward the Bachelor’s degree. The School views them as the core of its student body, but numerically they are only 26 per cent of all students.
5. Returning Bachelors.
   These students already hold a Bachelor’s degree and some have even higher degrees. They are supplementing their undergraduate education by attending the School and are enrolled as non-matriculated students. It is a fairly heterogeneous category. One common reason for their return is a change in career plans:
   
   I was a pre-law student in college and I spent a year at law school. It wasn’t exactly my dish of tea, and now I’m taking chemistry to get into med. school.
   
   Another category of the Returning Bachelors consists of graduate students studying languages to meet the requirements for the Ph.D. Yet another category is made up of persons whose admission to the Graduate Faculties at Columbia University has been denied. By enrolling in the School of General Studies, they can usually take one or two graduate courses and thus achieve instruction through a back door. Occasionally, this practice is encouraged by the admission officer in the Graduate School, who later can reconsider the admission of the student on the basis of his performance as a student in General Studies. Still others could perhaps best be characterized as extension students with degrees. In all, the returning Bachelors make up for 29 per cent of the students in the School.

Table 1 gives a summary showing how the 5,500 students of the School are divided in these categories. If we assume that they represent ranks of varying degrees of competence, we might say that the non-matriculated degree students and the matriculated students constitute a dominant "middle-class" of the student body. The matriculated ones are the secure middle class, the non-matriculated ones represent a lower middle class striving for respectability and recognition by the School. It would be a mistake to assume that the rank differences between students are at all large. On the whole, they all feel they are in the same boat. However, there is a sense of advancement when a student is granted matriculated status. Some even celebrate it by giving parties or taking friends out for a drink.

While the above five categories are distinguishable ranks, it is normally not easy to discover which students in a classroom belong to one category or the other, short of a personal interview. The matriculated students register on pink forms and the non-matriculated ones on green forms. By watching what color of forms a student carries around at registration time, his fellows might tell whether he is matriculated or not, but during the semester there is normally no way for a fellow student to find out except by asking. After examinations, the grades are publicly posted and the list again makes a distinction between matriculated and non-matriculated students. The instructors always know who is matriculated and who is not. There is little doubt, however, that the teachers would welcome more information about just what kind of non-matriculated students they have in a class. At present, they have no easy way of knowing whether a non-matriculated student is a returning Bachelor, a degree student or an extension student.

The following discussion of students in the School of General Studies will concentrate on those who treat the School as a genuine college, that is, those who aspire toward a degree from the School. Thus we will deal with Validation Students, Non-matriculated Degree Students, and Matriculated Students. They consist of 64 per cent males and 36 per cent females. We shall call them degree students. Extension students and Returning Bachelors will receive comparatively little attention.

Within the group of degree students there are rules about the tenure in each rank and rules about promotions to higher ranks. A validation student remains so for two semesters (or its equivalent in part-time study) taking at least three courses a semester. If he obtains a B average he moves up; if not, he is dropped from the University. The non-matriculated degree student can remain in that category until there is one academic year of full-time study (30 semester hours) left to the Bachelor’s degree. Most students are, however, encouraged to present their application for matriculation before this point. At any rate, at least one year of full-time study or its equivalent in part-time study has to be spent as a matriculated student.

When we turn from the student body of the School of General Studies to the teaching staff, we see that in many ways their position coincides with that of the staff in a conventional undergraduate school. But there are also differences, differences which have had considerable effect on the school.

In the School of General Studies, the full time teacher is required to spend twelve hours a week in class. This is a high figure, in Barnard and Columbia Colleges, the figure is nine hours a week, and in the Graduate School, from four to six hours a week. In general, the teacher is free to use his class room time as he sees fit. The Dean of the School has, however, in a mimeographed booklet given to all instructors in the School, expressed some hints as to what he considers an ideal classroom performance:

The work in our General Studies courses should normally consist of carefully planned class discussions based on reading assignments, written and oral reports on the part of the students, quizzes, term papers, and examinations. The instructor should make every effort to keep his class from becoming simply a series of personal lectures. 16)

The school further expects that the teacher will keep office hours for students once or twice a week.

The teaching staff in the School of General Studies is also expected to do research and to publish in the same fashion as other university teachers. But if one assumes a conscientious teacher who spends two hours to prepare each classroom hour, it is plain that out of a standard forty hour work-week he has only two or three hours left for research. Thus research becomes almost exclusively a spare-time pursuit. In practice, of course, research and teaching are not necessarily deadly enemies in the School of General Studies. Even an undergraduate class can profit from hearing the instructor talk about his own research, and an audience of adult students is a good sounding board for a researcher. The publication activities of the teaching staff of General Studies can be assessed through the University Bibliography, an unpublished file kept by the Secretary of Columbia University. The file is dependent on the cooperation of the teachers, who are urged to volunteer information about research and publication activities. Many of them fail to file requested information; this may be simple forgetfulness or it may be a subtle indication that they have not published anything in a certain year. For the period 1955-56, 37 of the 66 teachers who are faculty members in the School of General Studies, that is, have professional rank and full teaching in the School, reported. In this two year period they had published a total of 25 books and 112 articles. Clearly, the core of the teaching staff have a high record of scholarly productivity.

In addition to teaching and research, a few administrative chores are imposed on every teacher. For example, the dean urges the teachers to take attendance in class and to keep attendance records. Teachers are also expected to write letters of recommendation for students who apply for scholarships or positions or for entrance into graduate or professional schools. No strict rule prevails here, but the general feeling is that a teacher cannot decline to write a letter for a student he knows; he may write a bad letter from the student’s point of view, but he cannot refuse to write one.

The most important criterion used in the hiring of teachers is not teaching skill but research productivity. Seventy per cent of the full-time teaching staff in the School of General Studies hold a Ph.D. degree or its equivalent. This means that they have carried out at least one research project – the thesis project. Columbia University can normally attract the very best of scholarship. In many departments, therefore, further research work is expected of those who are considered for employment as teachers. In about a dozen employment interviews in the Sociology Department for non-tenure vacancies in the School of General Studies, the candidate’s bibliography was carefully examined, and he was asked about his current and planned future research. Much weight was put on the latter. Some fields afford to be less strict. The research skills of an elementary language teacher, for example, need not be so outstanding, but instead one would expect him to have a good familiarity with the countries and cultures of the language.

In many cases it cannot be denied that an attractive classroom performance is also judged essential in the School of General Studies. The position of the School is such that very strong emphasis must often be put on teaching skills. The Dean reminds the staff of the School of the high fees paid by a student:

In our relations with our students, there is one fundamental idea I should like to stress: the students are our prime responsibility and chief concern. We are here to teach them and to serve them in every way we can. All our University machinery is supposed to operate for their benefit. 17)

Nevertheless, in spite of this clear emphasis on class room skills, the author has never heard of an instance in which a teaching test was given to a prospective instructor.

The teachers in the School of General Studies are divided into a number of ranks. The rank system is the same as that in other schools of Columbia University and indeed the same as in most American universities. It has five clear cut ranks and one ambivalent one.

1. Lecturer. The position of lecturer is the wild card in the academic status game. For example, a lecturer may be a distinguished scholar visiting the School and contributing a course or two, or he may be a young person starting an academic career, or he may be a person who has acquired his competence outside the academic world and lacks formal degrees.
2. Instructor. The instructor is the lowest-ranking teacher in the regular rank scale. He is appointed for one year at a time. During the course of this study, the minimum salary received for full-time service as an instructor at Columbia University was $4,000.
3. Associate. Instructors whom the University wants to keep or give a slight salary bonus, but who are not eligible for professional rank may serve the University as Associates. They hold their position on the basis of teaching merits rather than research merit. In the School of General Studies, several Associates are teachers whom the School was more or less obliged to take from the University Extension.
4. Assistant Professor. The assistant professors constitute a pool of younger talents that the University can draw upon for its permanent positions. Assistant professors are eligible to serve as members of the Faculty; they may be called upon to sit in on Ph.D. examinations either as examiners or observers; and they may do part-time administrative services to the University. Yet the University has no commitment to them; they receive one year appointments. Their minimum salary was $5,000 during the course of this study.
5. Associate Professor. Associate professors are teachers and faculty members with life tenure. Their minimum salary was fixed at $6,000 during the period of our study.
6. Full Professor. The full professors hold the highest rank and life tenure. Their minimum salary at the time of our research was $9,000 per annum. Chairmanships of departments and important academic committees are normally privileges and responsibilities reserved for this category.

While these ranks are found in all schools and colleges of Columbia University, the proportion of teachers in each rank is quite different. Table 2 compares the distribution of ranks in the School of General Studies with that in Columbia College, the other undergraduate school in the Columbia Corporation.

This table reveals several notable variations. First, there is a lower proportion of tenured teachers in the School of General Studies: 23 per cent as compared to 33 per cent in Columbia College. There is also a lower proportion of teachers of professional ranks: 35 per cent in the School and 54 per cent in the College. Instead, the majority of teachers in the School of General Studies hold the ambivalent rank of lecturer.

The rank difference between the extremes of the academic hierarchy, the instructor and the full professor, at Columbia University is considerable. The simple fact that the professor earns more than twice and sometimes three times as much as the instructor sets them apart in many ways. A typical instructor lives in the area of 116th Street campus of Columbia University, a fairly unattractive neighborhood a few blocks from the Negro slum of Harlem and a few blocks from the new Puerto Rican slum on Amsterdam and Columbus Avenues. The full professor is likely to be a suburbanite or a commuter from a more attractive neighborhood. Even more important than the differences in standard of living is the difference in the academic achievements. The bibliography of the professor is usually many times larger and weightier than that of the instructor. The deference and honors given to the professors set them even further apart from the instructors in the scholarly community than their salary differences indicate. While first names and informal contacts often throw a veil of equality over the teaching staff, no one really forgets these differences. Particularly, the non-tenured personnel are very much aware of the fact that their seniors in rank decide their academic future at Columbia and also have much influence over their chances to get a position at other universities. In no way can one say with any certainty that the rank differences within the teaching staff of Columbia University are smaller than those at a typical European university.

The ranks of the teachers are printed with the names of the teachers in the annual bulletin of courses published by the School of General Studies. This list on the beginning pages of the bulletin is not normally read by the students; there is no reason why they should bother about this information. The students read course descriptions and scheduling information. This material also contains the titles of the teachers, but in a very simplified manner. Only the titles "professor," "doctor," and "Mr.," "Mrs. ," and "Miss" occur in this listing. Thus, assistant professors and associate professors are referred to as simply "professors" and most lecturers and instructors are referred to as "doctor". This practice is also maintained in all introductions and conversations. In this way, students (and outsiders) become much less aware of the rank differences among the teachers, and the teachers appear as a more homogeneous group to them. Presumably, this is helpful to the teachers, since it plays down the risk of the embarrassing situation in which a student appeals in matters of knowledge to teachers of higher rank, and it thus gives assurance to the young teachers who most need it. At the same time, it tends to deprive the full professors of receiving more deference from the student than the assistant professor. Professors from Europe visiting the United States are often puzzled about this failure of deference. Conversely, lower ranking academicians from Europe often take delight in the speed with which they can command a professor’s title.

At the time of this study some new rules about the promotion pattern were issues of considerable interest. 18)  A teacher can hold the rank of instructor only for a few years; before the end of this period he must be promoted or he is dropped from the University. In a similar fashion; an assistant professorship can be held for a limited number of years so that no one holds a non-tenure position for more than five years.

Associate and full professorships are life-time positions. It follows that the hurdle between the assistant and associate professorship is the most crucial one, both for the individual and for the University. The non-tenured positions can be filled at the pleasure of a Department. In filling the tenure positions, the Department has a voice, but the University has, nominally at least, the deciding vote. At the time of this study, it became mandatory to have an ad hoc committee of experts review every tenure appointment. (This was a practice of long standing, but it had previously not been used in instances of non-controversial appointments.) The President of the University or his delegate is always a member of this committee and so is a representative of the Department (usually the Chairman) which has a tenure position to be filled. The committee members are mostly from Columbia University, but members might be drawn also from other universities whenever this is practical. The Department nominates one (occasionally more than one) person for the position and presents the committee with the following material:

1. a statement of the services the nominee would be expected to render to the University;
2. a summary of the nominee’s professional and personal biography;
3. a full list (and copies) of the nominee’s publications (including important reviews);
4. reviews of the publications or extracts from such reviews;
5. a summary statement of the work the nominee currently has in progress and of the directions in which his future work seems likely to lead;
6. letters from leading scholars, at Columbia and elsewhere, in which the writers appraise the nominee as scholar and teacher and in which they compare his qualities with those of other important men in the field who are at similar stages of development. 19)

The committee is expected to review three questions: a) does the Department and the University need a position and a person in the line proposed? b) has the Department made an adequate canvass of available candidates? and, most important, c) is the nominee’s competence such that he is qualified? The recommendation of the Committee is forwarded to the President for action. It is treated as a confidential document. It may be noted that the Committee is not required or allowed to announce a vacancy, nor to invite applications or to evaluate others than the nominees. These are the tasks of the Department, or rather tasks of the seniors in rank to the nominee within the Department. No standard practice exists in these matters within the Departments. All one can say is that the Departments have strong motivations for care in their choice; the position of Columbia University in the hierarchy of American universities is such that only very few of those who are given tenure at Columbia are likely to find more attractive positions at other universities. Thus the appointment of a person to a tenure position normally means that the Department is married to this person until the mandatory retirement age of 68 or the optional one at 65. In spite of the elaborate procedure of tenure appointments, it might be ventured that the departments, not the colleges and schools, still have the essential control over the assignment of personnel. This observation is necessary to remember as a background to our later discussion of the personnel policy of the School of General Studies.

The administrative staff of the School of General Studies includes a Dean and an Associate Dean. They deal with the departments through thirty-six departmental representatives, and occasionally also through departmental chairmen. The major responsibilities of the Dean lie in the realm of the external affairs of the School. He handles its relations to the President’s office and to other Columbia faculties He reviews departmental budgets related to the School and prepares and forwards a budget for the School to the President. Since the School is new and unique, the Dean also finds it essential to spend considerable time in formulating its philosophy and presenting and explaining it to the University and the larger community. In the latter public relations role he is assisted by a representative from the Development Office of the University who is assigned to the School and is expected to take a particular interest in promotion and alumni activities. The Dean also has an Executive Assistant for aid in budgeting and office management. The Associate Dean has similar duties but is especially assigned to student affairs. For example, he is chairman of a group of twenty-five part-time Advisors to Students, all of whom are teachers and many of whom are departmental representatives. These Advisors aid students in planning an approved sequence of courses. More individual student problems are dealt with by an Assistant to the Dean, and in certain particularly difficult cases by the Associate Dean. Closely affiliated with the School, are an Assistant Registrar and an Associate Director of Admissions assigned to the School by the University. The large number of documents essential to this organization require, of course, special personnel: an Administrative Assistant to the Dean is in charge of publications, and half a dozen secretaries work under the Executive Assistant. To channel numerous inquiries, the School also maintains a Receptionist at an information desk.

In all, the immediate administration of the School of General Studies is in the hands of seven persons – dean, associate dean, admissions officer, registrar, assistant to dean (student affairs), executive assistant (budget and office management), administrative assistant (publications) – and their secretaries. This is a rather low figure for such a large college. In Columbia College, which has a smaller student body and a less extensive teaching staff, the corresponding personnel are ten in number (dean, dean of students, admission officer, registrar, proctor, two assistant deans, two assistants to the dean, administrative assistant).

Certain administrative decisions are reviewed and made by a special body known as the Faculty of General Studies. Membership in the Faculty is by invitation to those of professional rank. Sixteen per cent of the teaching staff of the School belong to the Faculty of General Studies. This is a small figure: in Columbia College 57 per cent of the teachers have faculty status. Most of the matters which it considers relate to academic requirements for admission, matriculation, and graduation. Certain appointments to non-tenure ranks have to be passed on by the Faculty. Also the Faculty elects representatives to the University Council, a high ranking body reviewing many decisions affecting the scholarly standing of the University. Most work of the Faculty is done through committees, the most important one being the standing Committee on Instruction.