Part 7

The idea of co-education in secondary schools has spread in several other European countries, especially in Holland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. In Scandinavia, the new practice appears to have begun with the establishment of a private higher secondary school, the Palmgremska Samskolan, in Stockholm, in 1876. A similar school, Nya Svenska Läroverket, was founded upon the same model in Helsingfors, Finland, in 1880. In Norway, the law of 1896 introduced co-education in all state schools. In Denmark, as in Norway, co-education was begun in private schools; on its proving a success there, it was introduced into the state schools, with two exceptions; and it is now obligatory in most state schools but optional in private schools (J. S. Thornton, _Schools Public and Private in the North of Europe_, 1907, p. 97). In Holland, there is now a good deal of co-education in lower secondary schools of the modern type. For example, at Utrecht, the state higher burgher school provides the same course of instruction, except in gymnastics, for boys and girls. At Almeloo, the municipal higher burgher school, though co-educational, differentiates the classes in several subjects. In Belgium, France, Germany and Austria, co-education, though frequent in elementary schools, is regarded as undesirable in secondary; but the movement in its favour in many parts of Germany seems to be gathering strength. All over Europe the Roman Catholic populations prefer the older ideal of separate schools for boys and girls.

Co-education in colleges and universities, which began at Oberlin, Ohio, in 1833, was adopted almost without exception by the state universities throughout the west of America from 1862 onwards. Since that time the idea has spread rapidly throughout Europe, and the presence of women students at universities originally confined to men is one of the most striking educational facts of the age.

_Co-education in the United Kingdom, (a) England and Wales._--The Board of Education does not possess any summary showing the number of pupils in mixed public elementary schools or in mixed departments of such schools. In 1901, out of 31,502 departments of public elementary schools in England and Wales, nearly half (15,504) were mixed departments, in which boys and girls were educated together. But as the departments were of unequal size, it must not be inferred from this that half the children in public elementary schools in that year (5,883,762) were receiving co-education. Of the total number of departments in public elementary schools in England and Wales, the percentage of mixed schools fell from 51.6 in 1881 to 49.4 in 1891 and 49.2 in 1901. But these percentages must not be taken to prove an absolute decline in the number of children in mixed departments.

In England, out of 492 public secondary schools which were recognized by the Board of Education for the receipt of government grant for the school year ending July 31, 1905, and which contained 85,358 pupils, 108 schools, with 21,720 pupils, were mixed; and 20 schools, with 8980 pupils, were dual schools.

Thus, of the total number of pupils in the secondary schools referred to above, a little over 25% were in mixed schools, and about 10% were in dual schools. It is not safe to assume, however, that all the mixed schools were completely co-educational in their work, or that the dual schools were not co-educational in respect of certain subjects or parts of the course. It should also be remembered that, besides the secondary schools recognized by the Board of Education for the receipt of government grant, there is a considerable number of great endowed secondary boarding-schools ("public schools" in the English use of that expression) which are for boys only. There are also at least 5000 private secondary schools, of which, in 1897 (since when no comprehensive statistical inquiry has been made), 970, with 26,027 pupils, were mixed schools. But the great majority of the children in these mixed schools were under twelve years of age. The number of boys and girls over twelve years of age, in the mixed private secondary schools which were included in the 1897 return, was only 5488.

In Wales, for the school year ending July 31, 1905, out of 84 state-aided public secondary schools, 11 were mixed and 44 were dual schools. The number of scholars in the Welsh schools referred to above was 9340. Of these, 1457, or 15%, were in mixed schools, and 5085, or 54%, were in dual schools. The managers of dual schools in Wales have the power to arrange that boys and girls shall be taught together in any or all the classes; and, as a matter of fact, nearly all the dual schools are worked as mixed schools, though they appear in these figures under dual.

_(b) Scotland._--In the public elementary schools, including the higher grade schools of Scotland, co-education is the almost universal rule. The exceptions, which for the most part are Roman Catholic or Episcopal Church schools, tend to diminish year by year. In 1905, out of 3843 departments in the Scotch public elementary and higher grade schools, 3783 were mixed. These include the infant departments. Out of the total number of children in the public elementary and higher grade schools, including infants' departments, 98.43% were receiving co-education.

In the secondary schools of Scotland there has been in recent years little perceptible movement either towards co-education or away from it. What movement there is, favours the establishment of separate secondary schools for girls in the large centres of population. Out of 109 public secondary schools in Scotland in 1905-1906, 29 schools were for boys only and 40 schools for girls only. One school had boys and girls in separate departments. In the remaining 39 schools, boys and girls were taken together to an extent which varied with the subjects taken; but there was nothing of the nature of a strict separation of the sexes as regards the ordinary work of the school.

_(c) Ireland._--In Ireland, the percentage of pupils on the rolls of mixed national schools (_i.e._ schools attended by boys and girls), to the total number of pupils on the rolls of all national schools, has slowly increased. In 1880 the percentage was 57.5; in 1898, 59.4; in 1905, 60.9.

The Commissioners of Intermediate Education in Ireland had on their list in 1906, 38 secondary schools which were classified by them as mixed schools. These schools were attended by 640 boys and 413 girls between 13 and 19 years of age. The commissioners do not know to what extent the boys and girls in these schools received instruction in the same classes. As, however, the schools are small, they believe that in the great majority of cases the boys and girls were taught together. In one large school not classified as mixed, the boys (117) and girls (60) were taught in the same classes.

_Universities and University Colleges in the United Kingdom._--Women are admitted as members of the universities of London, Durham, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield, Wales, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, St Andrews, Glasgow, Dublin and the Royal University of Ireland. At Oxford and Cambridge women are not admitted as members of the university, but by courtesy enjoy entrance to practically all university lectures and examinations. The social life of the men and women students is more separate in the old than in the new universities. In no grade of education in the United Kingdom has the principle of co-education made more rapid advance than in the universities. The university education of women began in London (Queen's College 1848, Bedford College 1849, both being preceded by classes in earlier years). The University of London in 1878 decided to accept from the crown a supplemental charter making every degree, honour and prize awarded by the university accessible to students of both sexes on perfectly equal terms. By charter in 1880, the Victoria University (now broken up into the universities of Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds) received power to grant degrees to women as well as to men. The charter of the university of Wales (1893) provides that "Women shall be eligible equally with men for admittance to any degree which our university is authorized to confer; every office created in the university, and the membership of every authority constituted by the charter shall be open to women equally with men." In 1889 the Universities (Scotland) Act empowered the commissioners to make ordinances, enabling each university to admit women in graduation in one or more faculties and to provide for their instruction. At all the university colleges in the United Kingdom women are educated as well as men.

_United States._--Co-education is a characteristic feature of the educational system of the different states of the American Union. Of elementary school pupils at least 96%, and of secondary school pupils 95%, are in mixed schools. In 1903, out of a total enrolment of 15,990,803 pupils in public elementary and secondary schools and training colleges, 15,387,734 were in schools attended by pupils of both sexes. Out of 550,600 pupils on the rolls of public secondary schools (high schools) in 1902, 523,300 were in co-educational schools. The same was true of 43% of the pupils (numbering over 100,000) in private secondary schools. In colleges and universities 62% of all undergraduates were in co-educational institutions, to which category thirty-four American universities belong (U.S. Commissioner of Education, _Report for 1903_, p. 2454). In America opinion is thus predominantly in favour of co-education, but there is a current of adverse criticism, especially among some who have had experience of school conditions in large cities.

_General Review of the Question._--In schools for infants and younger children co-education is approved by all authorities. It is increasingly favoured on educational grounds in smaller schools for children up to 12 or 13 years of age or thereabouts. But where elementary schools have to be large, separate departments for boys and girls are generally preferable, though mixed schools are often established for reasons of economy. At the other end of the educational scale, viz. in the universities, the co-education of men and women in the same institution is fast becoming the rule. This is due partly to the prohibitive cost of duplicating teaching staff, laboratories, libraries and other equipment,

## partly to the desire of women to qualify themselves for professional

life by passing through the same courses of training as are prescribed for men. The degree, however, to which social intercourse is carried on between men and women students differs widely in the different co-educational universities. There are occasional signs, _e.g._ at Chicago, of a reaction against the fullest form of academic co-education. And it is probable that the universities will provide, among many courses common to men and women, some (like engineering) suitable for men only, and others (like advanced instruction in home-science, or certain courses of professional preparation for teachers of young children) which will rarely be attended by any but women. Common use of the same university institutions is compatible with much differentiation in courses of study and with separately organized forms of collegiate life. It is with regard to the part of education which lies between the elementary schools and the universities that the sharpest division of opinion upon the principle of co-education now exists. In Europe, with the exception of Scandinavia, those who advocate co-education of the sexes in secondary schools up to 18 or 19 years of age are at present in a distinct minority, even as regards day schools, and still more when they propose to apply the same principle to boarding schools. But the application of the co-educational principle to all schools alike is favoured by an apparently increasing number of men and women. This movement in opinion is connected with the increase in the number of girls desiring access to secondary schools, a demand which can most easily and economically be met by granting to girls access to some of the existing schools for boys. The co-educational movement is also connected with a strong view of sex equality. It is furthered by the rapidly increasing number of women teachers who are available for higher educational work. Mixed secondary schools with mixed staffs are spreading for reasons of economy in smaller towns and rural districts. In large towns separate schools are usually recommended in preference, but much depends upon the social tradition of the neighbourhood. Those who advocate co-education for boys and girls in secondary schools urge it mainly on the ground of its naturalness and closer conformity to the conditions of healthy, unselfconscious home life. They believe it to be a protective against uncleanness of talk and school immorality. They point to its convenience and economy. They welcome co-education as likely to bring with it a healthy radicalism in regard to the older tradition of studies in boys' secondary schools. They approve it as leading to mixed staffs of men and women teachers, and as the most effectual way of putting girls in a position of reasonable equality with boys in respect of intellectual and civic opportunity. On the other hand, those who oppose co-education in secondary schools rest their case upon the danger of the intellectual or physical overstrain of girls during adolescence; and upon the unequal rate of development of boys and girls during the secondary school period, the girls being more forward than the boys at first, but as a rule less able to work as hard at a somewhat later stage. The critics further complain that co-education is generally so organized that the girls' course of study is more or less assimilated to that of the boys, with the result that it cannot have the artistic and domestic character which is suitable for the majority of girls. Complaint is also made that the head of a co-educational school for pupils over the age of 10 is usually a man, though the health and character of girls need the care and control of a woman vested with complete authority and responsibility. While demurring to the view that co-education of the sexes would be a moral panacea, the critics of the system admit that the presence of the girls would exert a refining influence, but they believe that on the whole the boys are likely to gain less from co-education than the girls are likely to lose by it. In all these matters carefully recorded observation and experiment are needed, and it may well be found that co-education is best for some boys and for some girls, though not for all. Temperaments and dispositions differ. Some boys seem by nature more fitted for the kind of training generally given to girls; some girls are by nature fitted for the kind of training generally given to boys. The sex division does not mark off temperaments into two sharply contrasted groups. The introduction of girls into boys' secondary schools may remove or mitigate coarse traditions of speech and conduct where such persist. But it would be unfortunate if stiff and pedantic traditions of secondary education were now fixed upon girls instead of being reconsidered and modified in the interests of boys also. In any case, if co-education in secondary schools is to yield the benefits which some anticipate from it, great vigilance, careful selection of pupils and very liberal staffing will be necessary. Without these securities the results of co-education in secondary schools might be disappointing, disquieting or even disastrous.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Plato in the _Republic_ (v. 452-456) and _Laws_ (vii. 804-805) argues that women should share as far as possible in education with men. Mary Wollstonecraft, _A Vindication of the Rights of Women_ (1792), contends that "both sexes ought, not only in private families but in public schools, to be educated together." J. G. Spurzheim, _Principles of Education_, pp. 272-288 (Edinburgh, 1821), replies to this argument. In the Board of Education _Special Reports on Educational Subjects_, vol. vi. (Wyman & Sons, 1900), J. H. Badley, writing on _The Possibility of Co-education in English Preparatory and other Secondary Schools_, is strongly in favour. "In co-education ... half-heartedness means failure. The more completely both sexes can be brought together upon an equal and natural footing the less the difficulties grow." In the Board of Education _Special Reports_, vol. xi. (Wyman & Sons, 1902), Rev. Cecil Grant, writing on _Can American Education be grafted upon the English Public School System?_ answers strongly in the affirmative; co-education is recommended on eight grounds:--(1) Vast economy of expenditure; (2) return to the natural system; (3) discipline made easier; (4) intellectual stimulus; (5) a better balance in instruction; (6) improved manners; (7) prevention of extremes of masculinity or femininity; (8) a safeguard against the moral danger.

_Co-education: a series of Essays_ (London, 1903), edited by Alice Woods, is in favour of co-education, nine practical workers recording their experience; this is one of the best books on the subject. J. H. Badley's _Co-education after Fifteen: its Value and Difficulties_. _Child Life_ (London, January, 1906), is candid, judicious and practical. M. E. Sadler in _Reports on Secondary Education in Hampshire, Derbyshire and Essex_ (1904, 1905 and 1906 respectively) gives details of the curriculum of many co-educational secondary schools. In the U.S. Commissioner of Education _Report for 1903_, vol. i. pp. 1047-1078, Anna Tolman Smith, writing on _Co-education in the Schools and Colleges of the United States_, gives an historical review of the subject with bibliography (compare bibliography in _Report of U.S. Commissioner of Education for 1900-1901_, pp. 1310-1325). G. Stanley Hall on _Adolescence, its Psychology and its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education_, vol. ii. chap. xvii., on Adolescent Girls and their education (New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1904), is strongly against co-education during adolescence. In W. Rein's _Encyklopädisches Handbuch der Pädagogik_ (Langensalza, Beyer), art. "Gemeinsame Erziehung für Knaben und Mädchen," K. E. Palmgren is in favour of co-education (vol. iii. of 2nd ed. 1905). See also W. Rein, _Über gemeinsame Erziehung von Knaben und Mädchen_ (Freiburg, 1903), and _Bericht über den I. Internationalen Kongress für Schulhygiene_ (Nürnberg, 1904), vol. ii. pp. 140 ff., "Co-education in der höheren Schulen." (M. E. S.)

COEFFETEAU, NICOLAS (1574-1623), French theologian, poet and historian, was born at Saint-Calais. He entered the Dominican order and lectured on philosophy at Paris, being also "ordinary preacher" to Henry IV., and afterwards ambassador at Rome. In 1606 he was vicar-general of the congregation of France, and received from Marie de' Medici the revenues of the sees of Lombez and Saintes. He also administered the diocese of Metz, and was nominated to that of Marseilles in 1621, but ill-health obliged him here to take a coadjutor. Coeffeteau won considerable distinction in the controversy against the Protestant reformers and also wrote a _History of Rome from Augustus to Constantine_. Many of his theological writings were collected in one volume (Paris, 1622), and at the time of his death in 1623 he was engaged on a translation of the New Testament which is still in manuscript.

COEHOORN, MENNO, BARON VAN (1641-1704), Dutch soldier and military engineer, of Swedish extraction, was born at Leeuwarden in Friesland. He received an excellent military and general education, and at the age of sixteen became a captain in the Dutch army. He took part in the defence of Maastricht in 1673 and in the siege of Grave in the same year, where the small mortars (called coehorns) invented by him caused the French garrison considerable trouble (Seydel, _Nachrichten über Festungskriege_, Leipzig, 1818). He was made a colonel for his gallant conduct at the battle of Seneff (1674), and was present also at the battles of Cassel (1677) and Saint Denis (1678).

The circumstances of the time and the country turned Coehoorn's attention to the art of fortification, and the events of the late war showed him that existing methods could no longer be relied upon. His first published work, _Versterckinge de Vijfhoeks met alle syne Buytenwerken_ (Leeuwarden, 1682), at once aroused attention, and involved the author in a lively controversy with a rival engineer, Louys Paan (Leeuwarden, 1682, 1683; copies are in the library of the Dutch ministry of war). The military authorities were much interested in this, and entrusted Coehoorn with the reconstruction of several fortresses in the Netherlands. This task he continued throughout his career; and his experience in the work made him the worthy rival of his great contemporary Vauban. He formulated his ideas a little later in his chief work, _Nieuwe Vestingbouw op en natte of lage horizont_, &c. (Leeuwarden, 1685), in which he laid down three "systems," the characteristic feature of which was the multiplicity and great saliency of the works, which were calculated and in principle are still eminently suited for flat and almost marshy sites such as those of the Low Countries. He borrowed many of the details from the works of his Dutch predecessor Freytag, of Albrecht Dürer, and of the German engineer Speckle, and in general he aimed rather at the adaptation of his principles to the requirements of individual sites than at producing a geometrically and theoretically perfect fortress; and throughout his career he never hesitated to depart from his own rules in dealing with exceptional cases, such as that of Groningen. Subsequent editions of _Nieuwe Vestingbouw_ appeared in Dutch (1702, and frequently afterwards), English (London, 1705), French (Wesel, 1705), and German (Düsseldorf, 1709).

From 1688 to the treaty of Ryswick Coehoorn served as a brigadier. At the battle of Fleurus he greatly distinguished himself, and in 1692 he defended Namur, a fortress of his own creation. Namur was taken by Vauban; but the Dutch engineer had his revenge three years later, when the place, on which in the meantime Vauban had lavished his skill, fell to his attack. Coehoorn became lieutenant-general and inspector-general of the Netherlands fortresses, and the high-German peoples as well as his own countrymen honoured him. He commanded a corps in the army of the duke of Marlborough from 1701 to 1703, and in the constant siege warfare of these campaigns in the Low Countries his technical skill was of the highest value. The swift reduction of the fortress of Bonn and the siege of Huy in 1703 were his crowning successes. At the opening of his following campaign he was on his way to confer with Marlborough when he died of apoplexy at Wijkel on the 17th of March 1704.

His "first system" was applied to numerous places in Holland, notably Nijmwegen, Breda and Bergen-op-Zoom. Mannheim in Germany was also fortified in this way, while the "secondsystem" was applied to Belgrade and Temesvár in eastern Europe.

His son, Gosewijn Theodor van Coehoorn, wrote his life (re-edited Syperstein, Leeuwarden, 1860). See also v. Zastrow, _Geschichte der beständigen Befestigung_ (Leipzig, 1828); von Brese-Winiari, _Über Entstehen und Wesen der neueren Befestigungsmethode_ (1844); Cosseran de Villenoisy, _Essai historique sur la fortification_ (1869); Mandar, _Architecture des forteresses_ (1801); Krayenhoff, _Verhandeling over de erste versterkingsmanier van Coehoorn_ (Hague, 1823); Bosscha, _Nederlandsche heldend te Land_ (Amsterdam, 1838); Dewez, _Histoire de Belgique_ (Brussels, 1823); Ypey, _Narratio de rebus gestis Mennonis Cohorni_ (1771); Hennert, _Dissertation sur la fortification permanente_ (1795); Böhms, _Gründliche Anleitung zur Kriegsbaukunst_ (1776); _Axiomatas of allgemeene bekentnisse over de Vestinghbouw door Menno Baron van Coehoorn, Uytgewerkt door E. W. Berg_ (MS. in Dutch Ministry of War); Bousmard, _Essai général de fortification_ (1797); also the article FORTIFICATION AND SIEGECRAFT.

COELENTERA, a group or grade of the animal kingdom, the zoological importance of which has risen considerably since the time (1887) of the publication of the first article under that heading in the _Ency. Brit._ (9th edit.), even though their numbers have been reduced by the elevation of the Sponges or Porifera to the rank of an independent Phylum under the title Parazoa (W. J. Sollas, 1884). For the Coelentera thus restricted, the term Enterocoela, in contrast to Coelomocoela (the old Coelomata), was suggested by E. R. Lankester (1900).