GC Milestones
General College transitions—1950 through the present
By Tim Brady

Through the decades, General College responded creatively to societal changes

On the 50th anniversary of the founding of the General College of the University of Minnesota in 1983, Dean Jeanne Lupton described the institution as a “strange anomaly within a research university. It fits, but it doesn’t fit,” she said. Because of the college’s experimental role at the University, “we are always apart, always at the edge, always doing things differently. To some people,” she added, “different means not as good.”

From its inception, to well beyond Lupton’s tenure at the college, that assessment was true of GC—both as a description of the college’s role within the University and as it summarized attitudes toward it.

Founded as a grand experiment in opening the doors of the University to a wider variety of students and crafting an effective means of teaching those newcomers, General College faced the first of what would turn out to be a series of threats to its existence during World War II, when enrollment at GC plummeted, and austerity measures at the “U” led administrators to look at closing the college as a costsaving measure.

The General College was saved and thrived post-war when an influx of GIs to the University swelled the class lists at GC and helped validate its presence on campus. This period of relative stability was undercut by the fact that as the 1950s turned into the 1960s, more and more students from around the state followed the example of the GIs and decided to seek some form of higher education.

Creation of junior college system

The state of Minnesota responded by mandating the creation of 17 new junior colleges, including one each in Minneapolis and St. Paul. Many in the legislature felt that the creation of this school system obviated the need for the General College and pressure was soon felt at the University to do away with its own “junior college.”

With its feet to the fi re once again, GC pulled itself to safety through inventiveness and creativity. Under the successive leadership of deans Horace Morse, the longtime leader of the college who died suddenly in 1966, and Alfred Vaughan, who’d been assistant dean under Morse, and had served at GC almost since its inception, the college was quick to identify new populations of college students who needed the ongoing services of the General College. These included the increasing numbers of minority students who were arriving at the “U,” as well as non-traditional adult students, who were older than typical newcomers to the University, and increasingly female.

Responding quickly to “The Sixties”

Few institutions within the University were as quick as General College to respond to the unrest of the Vietnam War and civil rights eras. From the late 1960s through the 1970s, a new breed of student emerged on campus, and GC developed courses to accommodate the changes. The University’s fi rst course in American Indian arts and literature began at GC, for instance, before moving to the College of Liberal Arts. Developed, too, were programs to enhance basic skills for underserved students in reading, writing, and math.

New programs were begun to aid an increasing number of international students and foreign-born non-English-speaking newcomers, many of whom were refugees from the war in Southeast Asia. These included basic courses in grammar, writing, and speech. For the ever-growing numbers of non-traditional students, degree credit was offered for prior learning experiences, and evening and off-campus classes were made available to help meet their needs.

Nontraditional baccalureate degrees

Also established in the 1970s were two nontraditional baccalaureate degree programs. General College students were now able to acquire four-year degrees in two areas: a Bachelor of General Studies (BGS) and a Bachelor of Applied Studies (BAS). By the early 1980s, however, General College again became the focus of a group of detractors. It was criticized for being too accepting of students and was characterized, in a Minnesota Daily article that received a lot of attention at the college, as “the University’s high school.” Graduation rates at GC were said to be too low and the number of years it took for four-year degree candidates to graduate was too high.

As the size of the University continued to grow, many of these critics, who included University administrators, some students, and state legislators, felt that its standing as a quality research center was being diluted by programs like those offered by GC.

Another criticism suggested General College’s students would be better served in the state university system, or in the baccalaureate degree program established at the recently founded Metro State University. A study conducted by the state’s Higher Education Coordinating Board (HECB) in 1980 called for better coordination of efforts and non-duplication of services between the General College and local community colleges.

Commitment to focus

In 1985, the newly appointed University president, Ken Keller, created a University-wide program called Commitment to Focus, which was designed to concentrate the University’s efforts on boosting its standing as a research center and as a magnet for quality undergraduate students.

General College was again asked to reinvent itself. Both the associate and four-year degree programs at the college were discontinued. Faculty research efforts in developmental education programs were encouraged, and pressure was brought to improve the “low and slow” graduation rates of GC students.

Once again, GC rose to the challenge, but the criticisms of the college lingered. In 1996, University President Nils Hasselmo announced the pending closure of GC. Protests by University students, a staunch fi ght led by Dean David Taylor, and a positive review of its program by an outside panel of scholars helped save General College for another day—but critics of the college, there at its birth and there through its middle years, would remain to the end.