Rockefeller Foundation Funding and Medical Education in Toronto, Montreal, and Halifax

Rockefeller Foundation Funding and Medical Education in Toronto, Montreal, and Halifax

MARIANNE P. FEDUNKIW
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt80m21
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Rockefeller Foundation Funding and Medical Education in Toronto, Montreal, and Halifax
    Book Description:

    Fedunkiw focuses on three recipients - the University of Toronto (the leading Ontario medical school), McGill University ( Canada's medical school ), and Dalhousie University (the struggling Maritime school) - to demonstrate how the money made possible the introduction of full-time clinical teaching and encouraged greater public and private support for medical education. The shift to full time, although advocated by progressive educators, also led to a backlash in Toronto resulting in a provincial inquiry in Ontario that threatened to return the University of Toronto to government control. Her book not only provides a history of Canadian medical education and large-scale philanthropy in North America but also analyses the effects of philanthropic giving, the practice of matching fund gifts, and accountability.

    eISBN: 978-0-7735-7289-8
    Subjects: Business

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-viii)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. ix-x)
  3. Figures and Tables
    (pp. xi-xii)
  4. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xiii-2)
  5. INTRODUCTION A Tale of Three Cities
    (pp. 3-6)

    This book tells a story that has been buried in various archives, largely untold, for more than eighty years. It is a story of family connections, great wealth, public scandal, and the scientization of professional medical education.

    The goal of this work is not only to explain how Rockefeller millions helped Toronto, Montreal, and Halifax to finance changes in medical teaching, but also to show how perceptions and practices in medical science changed after the First World War, largely as a consequence of substantial financial support provided by donors putting long-desired teaching improvements into action. I do not tell the...

  6. 1 Ripe for Change: Medical Education in Flux
    (pp. 7-30)

    The Rockefeller Foundation’s gift of $5 million in 1919 marked a turning point in Canadian medical education. It represented a “way” to reform, to catch up finally to the “will” that had existed since the late nineteenth century. Ludmerer expresses a similar sentiment with regard to the Harvard medical school. He argues that Harvard had a distinct advantage in trying to reform teaching because it was adept at raising funds. The school raised $3 million in its drive of 1901 and hence had a head start on other schools in implementing the new scientific and research medicine ideal. Ludmerer acknowledges...

  7. 2 Rockfeller Aid: Which “Peaks to Make Higher”?
    (pp. 31-48)

    The story of the Rockefeller Foundation’s involvement in U.S. and Canadian medical education has been the subject of publications, of varying degrees of depth and from different perspectives, by past presidents and board members of the Foundation² and by historians³. One of the favourite areas of support was medical research and medical education, at first only in the United States. These endeavours have been well-documented. The millions given to American medical colleges between 1914 and 1960, via the Rockefeller General Education Board, included: Vanderbilt University (in Nashville, Tennessee), $17.5 million; University of Chicago, $14.5 million; Johns Hopkins University, $11.1 million;...

  8. 3 Turmoil in Toronto: The Provincial University
    (pp. 49-84)

    In 1919, the Rockefeller Foundation’s gift of U.S.$₁ million to the University of Toronto followed Sir John Craig Eaton’s endowment of $500,000. Both benefactors intended to aid the transition to and implementation of full-time clinical education. This chapter examines the university’s situation in 1919 and its shift to full time; the two major gifts; and the ensuing controversy and provincial inquiry. The final pages look at a U.S. example and the longer-term significance of the Rockefeller and Eaton gifts to Toronto.

    The 1900s and 1910s saw reforms at the University of Toronto. Among these changes, Trinity Medical College affiliated with...

  9. 4 Building on Strengths at McGill: The Nation’s University
    (pp. 85-108)

    The situation at McGill University’s medical school in Montreal in 1919 was not the same as Toronto’s. Although McGill, like Toronto, was to receive U.S.$₁ million of the $5 million allotted to Canadian medical education by the Rockefeller Foundation, it matched, spent, and viewed the gift very differently from Toronto. McGill was not Quebec’s “provincial university” - in fact, it billed itself as the “nation’s university.”¹ Even William Macdonald, one of McGill’s greatest benefactors, thought the university a national institution.

    This view of McGill gained substance from its affiliation, as a sort of senior or finishing institution, to a number...

  10. 5 Bouncing Back at Dalhousie: A Regional University
    (pp. 109-130)

    If, in the early decades of the twentieth century, the University of Toronto was the provincial university for Ontario, and McGill University a “national” institution, then Dalhousie University was, as located in the provincial capital,thepremier regional post-secondary school of the Maritimes. Although there were other universities in the region, Dalhousie stood out on two counts: it was non-denominational, and it was the only Maritimes school to offer training in professions other than religion - medicine, on and off, 1868-75 and again from 1889 on; dentistry from 1908 on; law from 1883 on; and engineering briefly, from 1905 to...

  11. Conclusion: Medical Education Transformed
    (pp. 131-150)

    Even before the publication of the Flexner Report in 1910, Canadian medical schools were participating in an age of reform. In that spirit, they erected new buildings and added new subjects, such as bacteriology and biochemistry, to the curriculum in a bid to modernize and “scientize” their programs. Scientization brought a definition of professionalism that ensured physicians’ autonomy and a degree of elitism that would sustain their status and high earnings. This was a reaction, as Ludmerer says, to competing medical sects in the early nineteenth century, including Thomsonianism, which flourished in the 1830s. As Ludmerer explains, U.S. Thomsonianism assumed...

  12. Notes
    (pp. 151-178)
  13. References
    (pp. 179-192)
  14. Index
    (pp. 193-201)