The Educational Philosophy of Catherine Beecher

During Catherine Beecher’s time, the extent to which women should be educated and the composition of that education was hotly debated. This short book is an outline of what should constitute an appropriate education for a young lady. Beecher spends equal time detailing a young woman’s moral education as she does the ideal young woman’s domestic education. The first half of the book is primarily devoted to theorizing about how women should be educated and a defense of a holistic approach to female education while the second half of the book details the specifics of how Beecher believes a house should be run.

According to Beecher: “We are not to annihilate the love of praise and admiration; but so to control it, that the favor of God shall be regarded more than the estimation of men” (Beecher 171). Also contrary to the commonsense wisdom of her day, Beecher suggests that young women should receive a rigorous physical education and women are not too delicate for intellectual rigor. “In consequence of this enfeebled state of their constitutions, induced by a neglect of their physical education, as soon as they are called to the responsibilities and trials of domestic life, their constitution fails, and their whole existence is rendered a burden” (Beecher 42).

It should be noted that Beecher was not an advocate of equality in terms of men’s and women’s position in society. Rather, she believed in the separate spheres ideology, or the notion that women and men should be relegated to different positions even though she also felt that women should be prepared for the mental rigor of domestic labor and that the female sphere was an important one. Still, many of Beecher’s principles were influential beyond that of the debate about the appropriate roles of the genders in American society. Beecher’s focus on education as a holistic art was important, given that it countered the usual emphasis on stuffing children’s heads with facts or drilling. Beecher saw children as individuals who were not small adults and who must be carefully nurtured so they reached their full potential, although she thought that women were uniquely capable of showing the necessary kindness as mothers and teachers to bring forth the next generation into being.
A good example of Beecher’s philosophy can be seen in her comments on women getting their hands dirty gardening. Even if women are fine ladies, she says, “it would be a most desirable improvement, if all female schools could be furnished with suitable grounds, and instruments, for the cultivation of fruits and flowers, and every inducement offered, to engage the young ladies in this pursuit” (Beecher 251). This will enable mothers to later instruct their own children about the natural world when the children are young and also enable women to cultivate their own flowers, which is far cheaper than having to purchase them to brighten the home.
Scholarly Journal Article
Roberts, Erie M. “Architecture of the Millennium: Catharine Beecher, Domestic Economy, and
Social Reform.” Constructing the Past, 7.1 (2006): 4-17. Web. 23 Oct 2017.
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/constructing/vol7/iss1/5
According to historian Erie M. Roberts, while Catherine Beecher was not a strong supporter of women’s suffrage, Beecher did support many prominent social justice movements. Roberts argues that many of Beecher’s causes were strongly rooted in her Protestantism. Specifically, many evangelical Protestants like Beecher, particularly in light of the Second Great Awakening, were filled with a sense that the upcoming millennium was fast approaching. The temperance movement, abolitionism, and the labor movement were all strongly aligned with a sense of national cosmology and a sense of American exceptionalism. There was an emphasis on the need for America to achieve its moral promise, which meant honoring principles of liberation and compassion.
Women played a strong role both in the evangelical and women’s movement. But Beecher, like many activists of the period, conceived of women’s role as an essentially supportive and private one confined to the home—writing letters, acting from within the church, and changing people’s opinions from the confines of the domestic sphere. Catherine Beecher specifically termed her brand of evangelical activism as Republican Motherhood. “Throughout her body of work, Beecher created an ideological outlook that placed women in the center” (Roberts 6). Women were critical in their ability to rear citizens who embodied American moral virtues. Even though America had a unique destiny, this destiny was not a foregone conclusion and women had special responsibilities to enable America to reach its fullest potential. The ability of women to be tender and compassionate enabled them to be keepers of Christian virtues. This idea that women were more sensitive to the suffering of enslaved Africans and to the suffering that drunkenness caused women and children were primary motivators for many women in their support of the cause. Beecher believed that if America was to be saved it was more likely to be “by woman more than man” (Roberts 8).
Roberts thus believes that Beecher’s philosophy had many radical elements, even though she would not necessarily be considered a radical today. Beecher’s support of progressive causes was staunchly rooted in religious rather than secular underpinnings. The church of her day still relegated women to secondary status but Beecher, in her personal cosmology, placed women front and center. Beecher saw the only suitable public role for a woman as a teacher because it was an incarnation of the women’s role as a mother taking care of children. Even women without children Beecher saw as primarily mothers, ministering to others and through their moral influence, guiding them to the correct view of God and society. This required training, however, and that is where the importance of teaching had its vital role. Human beings are not born moral; just as men had to be instructed to perform their professions well, so did women. Thus Roberts sees Beecher’s educational philosophy as both radical and deeply gendered.
Modern Day Connection Source
McCarthy, Joe. “Educating Girls is the Key to Ending Poverty.” Global Citizen. 23 Oct 2017.
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/educating-girls-is-the-key-to-ending-poverty/
People today likewise see education as a vitally important too in enacting societal changes. But in contrast to Catherine Beecher, rather than viewing keeping girls in the private sphere and teaching them how to be better at domestic tasks, today educating girls is seen as a radical tool of social equality. According to Joe McCarthy, women and girls are more likely to be poor in the developing world. They suffer from ignorance that results in limited professional prospects and often face marriage and childbirth very young, which limits their social possibilities. One of the most profound ways to reduce the likelihood that a young girl will have an early marriage is to secure her an education, and it is estimated that education reduces the likelihood of child marriage by 64 % (McCarthy). Education is itself emotionally and socially empowering for young women and encourages them to have a greater voice in their destiny. “An extra year of secondary school for a girl can increase her lifetime earnings by 15 to 25 percent” (McCarthy). There are also benefits for society as well as women become educated—women and girls are less likely to contract HIV/AIDS and their increased earnings and lower birthrates can have a spiraling effect of enrichment on the nation as a whole.
Thus Beecher’s notion that educating girls was important is borne out by the facts, but in this instance, what is beneficial is educating girls in how to be self-sufficient, not simply how to be better mothers and to serve what are largely male needs in the form of cooking, cleaning, and educating children. McCarthy notes that cultural barriers still exist which impede girls from attending school but education can have a spiraling effect as the children of educated women are more likely to be educated themselves. McCarthy uses a compelling mix of statistical data as well as emotionally compelling reasons to make expanding educational opportunities for women a major priority. His argument suggests that Beecher’s emphasis on educating women as holding the potential to change society was accurate, but not in the ways in which Beecher anticipated.