By Kaley McDevitt '23
Once, I tore my school skirt and my grandfather sewed it up. He told me he had learned in high school, and that I should learn how to sew myself. However, I mused at the fact that his school had taught him something that it hadn't taught me, something so essential to life. Has the school curriculum changed that drastically in 66 years? I don't believe so, however, one thing has changed and that is the focus on home economics. Although some areas of home economics may be seen as outdated, the few that remain are essential for students to know how to navigate the "real world". Without the incentive to learn how to sew or cook a balanced meal, many young adults may find themselves completely incapable and overwhelmed with their upcoming freedom.
Home economics in America has evolved over time -- like an empire, it had its golden age, opposition, and eventually met its fall. As one can guess, home economics - built on domestic principles - was originally a class made for women. The creator of home economics was Ellen Swallow Richards, who was a chemist and instructor at MIT. Her goal was to apply scientific principles to domestic topics. By making domestic topics efficient, women would have more time for pursuits other than cooking and cleaning. However, throughout the 20th century, both girls and boys began to participate in these classes. After World War II, and during the Cold War, many universities began to defund these programs and increase the budgets for science departments. For example, in the 1900s, Connecticut College for Women "forged its own path by integrating elements of
home economics, municipal housekeeping, and professional/clerical training into its academic program". However, by the early 1950s, higher education became a national interest, as "there was a shift from endeavoring to educate well-rounded generalist to a technically adept specialist". So, Connecticut College for Women eventually swept home economics out of the curriculum despite heavy resistance from former alumni. This abrupt shift is explained by the fact that, during the Cold War, the scientific field became stronger and more important than ever. For instance, the Space Race showed that no well-rounded college student could send a man into space, but a scientific specialist could help. This whole movement towards the sciences became vital to America's security as an influx of college students studying in the field would eventually rush into science-orientated jobs that would help push America's advancement.
Even so, we are thankfully not in a Cold War today, and there are numerous students in the science field. But what about home economics? In "Education for Homemaking in the Secondary Schools of the United States", Bernice Mallory claims that "enrollments in programs of education for home-making have grown ever since homemaking courses were first introduced in the secondary schools". Not only were students interested but so were educators as they believed in "the need for this kind of homemaking education in secondary schools". But where did it go? Well, some countries such as Japan made these activities mandatory. While Japan was not in a Cold War in 1947, Kateika (home economics) is still mandatory today. From fifth grade until high school, students learn everything from cooking, meal planning, shopping, sewing, and building wooden furniture in these classes. Japan is not the only example, in fact Britain introduced food education for all children in 2014 in order to combat obesity rates. Lastly, Finland, which has one of the world's best education systems in the world, requires students between the ages of 13 and 15 to take "Kotitalous", which is three hours per week for two years of home economics classes.
Home economics does work out in the long term and does contribute to the daily lives of graduated students, but the lack of these benefits has an even larger impact. Students who have taken these classes are later able to cook consistently, spend money wisely, manage their time in an orderly fashion, take care of their homes, and build personal development and relationships. Despite these results, rising generations are not assisted in learning the fundamentals of living in the "real world" and rely increasingly on the private sector to fill in the gap of the skills they were not taught.
For example, over the past few years the amount of food delivery has rapidly increased. Possibly because the once teenage millennials are now adults and have grown to realize they have no basic skills when it comes to taking care of themselves, and modern-day convenience furthers this ignorance. Soon, Generation Z will follow suit, becoming adults who will be forced to purchase pre-packaged meals and to rely on others to repair household items or electronics. This cycle will only continue, as parents of young children will not be able to pass down their domestic wisdom since they received no practical knowledge to begin with.
Ultimately, Gen Z and Millennials have been cheated out of vital life skills. The future is not something to predict but instead to build, yet how can someone build a future without the basics? Without proper measures to preserve, or rather bring back, home economics in the classroom, and with less and less incentives to learn these basic skills, many young adults may find themselves completely incapable and overwhelmed with their upcoming freedom. Needless to say, the future generations are screwed if their school curriculum does not change soon.
Editor: Cecilia Fiorindo
Fair Use Disclaimer
The images and contents in this article are under Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.
Comments