By: Leif Bromme
For years, Home Economics was a staple of the United States education system. The class
was originally for women and taught household skills like cooking, sewing, budgeting and
childcare. Kaltman Law explains that until the 1972 introduction of Title IX, which
integrated gender-segregated courses, men took a class called Industrial Arts. There, they
learned trade skills like carpentry, metalworking and mechanics.
Through the years, both classes helped to prepare students not just for employment, but
for the demands of daily life.
Home economics and industrial arts both eventually disappeared from course catalogues
in the decades following gender integration. Pittsburg Parents newsletter explains that part
of this decline was due to the prioritization of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math
(STEM) fields. Instead of maintaining expensive culinary or sewing rooms, schools chose to
invest in their STEM courses.
Despite integration, the gender division may have also associated these classes with
outdated domestic roles. Many of these changes, however, align with a societal change of
pace.
Until recently, it was essential to be able to cook consistent healthy meals; now, one can
subscribe to a meal service, use DoorDash or eat fast food. Rather than learning to mend
damaged clothing, most simply order new items online. Have we stopped teaching life
skills because other options are available, or have these options fed on a generation that
lacks life skills?
The decline of Home Economics also occurred here at Southern Adventist University,
where Summerour Hall originally contained the department. According to a 1989 issue of
the Southern Columns, students could graduate with a degree in Home Economics until
that same year, when its courses were dissolved or divided between other departments like
Health Science and Culinary Arts. In 2014, Summerour Hall was officially redesigned and
rededicated for the schools of Education, Psychology and Counseling.
Deborah Duerksen, a 1982 graduate of the Home Economics program, explained what
types of courses were involved in the degree.
“I took nutrition, psychology, dressmaking and pattern-making classes,” said Duerksen.
“We had classes with a pretend house and a dining room table. You had to make menus,
decorate, feed people and have a banquet night.”
In addition to daily classes, the major included experiential labs.
“They had labs for cooking and sewing,” said Duerksen, “and things like how to budget and
do laundry. [The course also included] relationship things; we discussed the stages you go
through in life and the decisions you must make.”
After graduating, Duerksen worked as a dean and home economics teacher at Cedar Lake
Academy (now Great Lakes Academy) and Forest Lake Academy before stepping away from
work in 1986.
“I thought about getting my master’s degree after 1986,” she explained, “But I couldn’t be a
full-time teacher. They didn’t have those [home economics] programs anymore.”
Duerksen argued that society places a higher value on courses that translate to money-making careers.
“Homemaking skills don’t have as much of a monetary value,” she said. “But if you don’t
know how to sew on a button, you have one less outfit. If your legs aren’t the same size as
everyone else’s, it may be harder to find pants. You can pay someone to hem or tailor or
make curtains, but having those skills saves a lot of money and makes it more unique to
what you want. But our society is ‘use it, break it, throw it away’. It’s not built to repair or
reuse.”
While this piece of history is forgotten by most Southern students, Duerksen presented
ample reason to prioritize practical education courses like Home Economics and Industrial
Arts. Some people are taught skills like cooking, maintenance, and clothing care by their
parents. Some are not. Even with family preparation, there is a stark difference between
handling life as a student and adjusting to the practical demands of adulthood.
Bringing back Home Economics as a simplified general education course rather than a full
degree would help students better prepare for those demands. While past iterations of the
program have focused on recipe development, the new course could emphasize affordable
eating, meal planning and meal preparation – skills more relevant to our modern world.
The class could also help students with cleaning, organization, bills, household
management, household maintenance and basic childcare. As a general education course,
it could also work with the existing personal finance course to teach students helpful
budgeting and investment tips for adulthood.
Some might view Home Economics as an outdated field – one deemed irrelevant in modern
society. That same modern society treats adulthood as a major hurdle. The internet is filled
with young adults coping with “adulting”: paying bills, managing finances, planning meals,
organizing a life independent of school and family.
Perhaps by reprioritizing practicality in our education, we can help reduce the pain of that
transition to adulthood. School won’t just be a place where we are taught to work, but a
place where we are taught to live.
