EXAMINING THE EVOLUTION AND INTERSECTIONS OF GARDENING PRACTICES IN NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH-CENTURY NEW YORK STATE A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Shangzhe Cai August 2024 © 2024 Shangzhe Cai ABSTRACT Often overlooked in historical discourse, kitchen gardening serves as a vital nexus of social, religious, and educational values. This thesis examines the dynamic evolution of kitchen gardening practices across New York State from the mid-nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, tracing the trend during suburbanization and its intertwining with educational reforms and the school garden movement. Through an interdisciplinary lens, this study unravels the intricate influences that shape these gardens, including social class, aesthetics, pedagogy, religion, and influential movements such as the Country Life Movement and Nature Study Movement. Moreover, it investigates the role of school gardening in supporting society during wartime and its enduring influences in the growing of home gardens and subsistence gardens after the decline of school gardens in the mid-twentieth century. iii BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Shangzhe (Kami) Cai is a second-year student in the Historic Preservation Planning program at Cornell University and will graduate with a Master of Arts degree in August 2024. She previously completed a five-year program in Landscape Architecture at Purdue University. Kami has one year of professional practice experience in landscape architecture and urban planning in Guangzhou, China. Her interest lies in the intersection of historic preservation and landscape architecture. Kami has had multiple experiences integrating historic preservation and landscape architecture. She developed a comprehensive Cultural Landscape Report for the Cayuga Museum of History and Art, where she conducted extensive research to document the landscape's history and formulated treatment recommendations for its interpretation and rehabilitation. Additionally, she was the project manager for the Design Connect Hammondsport Historic Park Rehabilitation project, supervising a team of eleven graduate and undergraduate students from various departments on this multidisciplinary project in historic preservation and landscape architecture. Her passion for landscape architecture and historic preservation drives her pursuit of opportunities in Cultural Landscape Preservation after graduation. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge and extend my warmest thanks to my advisor, Michael Tomlan, for his invaluable guidance and advice throughout my two years of studies at Cornell. His mentorship not only broadened my understanding of the historic preservation field but also continually encouraged me to pursue my interests in landscape architecture. Over these two years, he provided numerous opportunities for me to explore a wide range of projects in historic preservation, and he organized multiple conferences and field trips, allowing me to connect with professionals and learn from them. I would also like to thank my second committee member, Sonja Skelly, one of the instructors for the course Public Garden Management, which inspired me to work on this topic. A heartfelt thank you goes to my mom, who has always supported me and worked hard to provide me with the opportunity to study abroad and explore a diverse world. Her emotional support has been invaluable, especially when I passionately discussed my thesis topic with her, even though she didn't know much about it. I would like to thank my cohort, HPP ’24. It has been a pleasure to meet such a wonderful group of people. Special thanks to Jiayi, my “room” mate, with whom I often cooked and ate together. Thanks to Henny for exploring the Ithaca area with me. Also, a big thank you to Brytton, who was super organized and responsible for every field trip, booking excellent hotel rooms for us, and ensuring we reached our destinations safely. Additionally, I would like to extend my gratitude to all my friends: Linda Huang, Erin Huang, Yucong Ma, Feifei Huang, Catherine Tang, Roudan Chen, Yudong Sun, Xin Zhao, and more. Thank you all for your support and friendship. v TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE - THE RISE OF THE KITCHEN GARDEN ................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 3 SOCIAL CONTEXT AND THE ORIGINS OF SUBURBAN IDEAL ...................................................... 3 LIVING BEYOND THE CITY LIMITS ........................................................................................... 4 MEDIA, MARKETING, AND THE SUBURBAN DREAM ................................................................. 6 FROM RURAL TO SUBURBAN ................................................................................................... 9 ROMANTICISM IN SUBURBAN AMERICA ................................................................................. 10 THE PICTURESQUE AND JOHN CLAUDIUS LOUDON ................................................................ 11 ANDREW JACKSON DOWNING AND BEYOND .......................................................................... 12 EMERGENCE OF KITCHEN GARDENS ...................................................................................... 16 SEED INDUSTRY INFLUENCE .................................................................................................. 18 UNIQUE EXPERIENCE FOR MIDDLE AND UPPER CLASSES....................................................... 19 THE CHANGING ETHNICITY IN GROWING AND GARDENING ................................................... 19 CONTENTS OF NINETEENTH-CENTURY KITCHEN GARDENS ................................................... 21 THE PLANTS ........................................................................................................................... 23 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 24 CHAPTER TWO - THE COUNTRY LIFE MOVEMENT AND EDUCATIONAL REFORM ........................................................................................................................................................... 26 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 26 THE COUNTRY LIFE MOVEMENT ........................................................................................... 27 vi EDUCATION REFORMERS AND THE NATURE-STUDY MOVEMENT .......................................... 29 THE LINKS TO THE RISE OF SCHOOL GARDENS ...................................................................... 36 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 37 CHAPTER THREE - SCHOOL GARDENS IN URBAN AND RURAL SETTINGS ........... 39 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 39 THE SCHOOL GARDEN IN NEW YORK CITY ........................................................................... 39 THE CHILDREN'S SCHOOL FARM IN DEWITT CLINTON PARK, MANHATTAN, NEW YORK ...... 43 THE FAIRVIEW GARDEN SCHOOL ASSOCIATION, YONKERS, NEW YORK ............................... 48 THE INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN'S SCHOOL FARM LEAGUE ................................................... 52 THE SCHOOL GARDEN ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK ............................................................. 54 AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION IN THE RURAL SETTING ............................................................ 57 CORNELL’S EDUCATORS ........................................................................................................ 60 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 63 CHAPTER FOUR - GARDENS FOR HEALTH AND PROMOTING CIVIC VALUES ..... 65 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 65 GARDENS TO PROMOTE HEALTH............................................................................................ 65 PROMOTING CIVIC VALUES ................................................................................................... 67 THE UNITED STATES SCHOOL GARDEN ARMY ...................................................................... 70 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 74 CHAPTER FIVE - MANAGEMENT, CHALLENGES, AND LIMITATION OF SCHOOL GARDENS ........................................................................................................................................ 76 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 76 TRAINING FOR EDUCATORS IN SCHOOL GARDENING ............................................................. 76 vii COST AND FUNDING FOR SCHOOL GARDENS ......................................................................... 78 PLANT CHOICE FOR SCHOOL GARDENS.................................................................................. 81 CHALLENGES OF SCHOOL GARDENS ...................................................................................... 83 LIMITATION OF SCHOOL GARDENS ........................................................................................ 84 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 86 CHAPTER SIX - THE MID-CENTURY GARDEN DIVERSIFICATION ............................ 87 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 87 DECLINE OF SCHOOL GARDENS THAT EXISTED IN ONE FORM OR OTHER .............................. 87 HOME GARDENING ................................................................................................................ 89 THE SUBSISTENCE GARDEN ................................................................................................... 91 GARDEN PROJECT TYPES IN NEW YORK STATE ..................................................................... 92 THE ENDURING INFLUENCE OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION ................................................. 95 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 96 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 98 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Residence of Andrew Jackson Downing, Newburgh, New York. ............................ 13 Figure 2: Plan of a Compact House and Stable on a Corner Lot 128 x 220 feet. ..................... 22 Figure 3: Symbolic diagram created by John Dewey. (John Dewey, 1899.)............................ 31 Figure 4: Typical gang of street urchins at Hell’s Kitchen. (The New York Public Library Digital Collections.) ...................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 5: Planting Map of Children’s School Farm, 1905. (New York City Municipal Archives, Department of Parks Drawings Collection, 1905.) ........................................................................... 46 Figure 6: Children took a break from their work in Children’s School Farm in 1902. (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, 1902.) ............................................................................... 46 Figure 7: Children’s School Farm in 1908. (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, 1908.) ................................................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 8: Sanborn Map 1917 showing the location of Fairview Garden School. (Library of Congress, 1917.) ............................................................................................................................... 49 Figure 9: Some school children with plants raised in the classroom for decorating soldiers graves on Memorial Day. Fairview Garden School, Yonkers, N.Y., 1903. (New York State Archives. New York (State). Education Dept. Division of Visual Instruction, 1903.) ............................................. 51 Figure 10: Children’s School Farm exhibited by the New York City International Children’s School Farm League. (Collections of the Museum of the City of New York, ca. 1870-1910.) ....... 52 Figure 11: Public School 52 in Manhattan. (MyInwood.net.) .................................................. 56 Figure 12: School garden of Public School 52 in Manhattan. (MyInwood.net.) ...................... 57 Figure 13: Join the United States School Garden Army, Edward Penfield, 1918. (Library of Congress, 1918.) ............................................................................................................................... 73 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Estimated cost of school garden. ................................................................................ 80 Table 2: Plant List ..................................................................................................................... 82 1 INTRODUCTION Gardens have held a profound and enduring presence in American society. They serve as a vibrant bond with nature and a communal connection. Across the nation, from the lovely kitchen gardens flourishing in the backyards of suburban homes to the oasis of school gardens nestled amidst the concrete jungles of cities and even to the resilient subsistence gardens nurtured during economic hardship, gardening practices have woven themselves intricately into the very fabric of American history. In the kitchen garden, parents spent time with their children sowing seeds and watering plants, imparting the knowledge of cultivating their food. In the school garden, students stepped out of the classroom to learn the names of plants and witness the wondrous life cycle of nature in the sunshine. In the subsistence garden, individuals cultivated food for sustenance and shared it with the community. However, the story of these gardening practices remains largely untold. Despite the popularity of movements such as the Nature Study Movement in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, researchers and historians have paid little attention to the school garden initiatives associated with these movements. To trace the roots of garden movements, it is necessary to demonstrate that social changes played a significant role in their emergence. When the nation underwent rapid industrialization in the mid-nineteenth century, a collective desire arose for the simple rural lifestyles of yesterday. In the twenty-first century, where the world grapples with climate change and environmental crises, and education for the next generation becomes an increasingly prominent topic, there is a pressing need for environmental education beyond textbooks. Additionally, as society seeks sustainable living and innovative educational methods to foster environmental stewardship through experiential learning, understanding the historical context of school gardening practices becomes crucial. This thesis aims to fill the gap in gardening history by developing a comprehensive narrative of school gardening practices in late nineteenth and early twentieth-century New York State. With New York State hosting the first Children’s School Farm in New York City and Cornell University 2 emerging as a leading institution in the nature study movement, the state is an ideal study area for exploring the history of school gardening practices. Drawing on primary resources such as the annual reports of the New York City Parks Department and the School Garden Association of New York, along with relevant literature from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, this research provides insights into school gardening initiatives in urban and rural settings. Through examining practices in areas like New York City, Yonkers, and Upper State New York surrounding Cornell University in Ithaca, this study offers perspectives from both students and educators. This work reveals how the nostalgia for rural living, spurred by rapid industrialization, influenced various gardening movements. Kitchen gardening practices in suburban homes emerged as middle and upper-class families sought a closer connection to nature. School gardening initiatives, inspired by the philosophies of educators like Friedrich Fröbel and John Dewey and promoted by figures such as Frances Parsons and Liberty Hyde Bailey, emphasized hands-on learning and the joys of rural life amidst urbanization. Furthermore, the economic hardships of the Great Depression led to a rise in subsistence gardening, where practical skills were taught to empower communities. By examining the evolution and impact of these gardening practices, this thesis highlights their lasting legacy and provides valuable lessons for contemporary educational and community gardening initiatives. The interconnectedness of gardening practices throughout American history underscores a deep-seated nostalgia for country life and its associated virtues. Ultimately, this study aims to inspire the current generation about the importance of gardening education and to preserve the intangible heritage of these initiatives for the future, recognizing the enduring value of gardening practices in fostering environmental stewardship and community engagement. 3 CHAPTER ONE - THE RISE OF THE KITCHEN GARDEN Introduction The idea of planting a garden near the kitchen for easy access is well-established in several societies worldwide. This thesis's geographical and chronological scope is primarily the northeastern United States during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This chapter traces the post- colonial transformation from wilderness settlements through domesticated agrarian growth to post- Civil War urban growth and burgeoning suburbanization. The literature cited demonstrates Romanticism, linked to horticulture that gave rise to kitchen garden popularity. Social Context and the Origins of Suburban Ideal The United States underwent rapid expansion and transformation during the early nineteenth century. This era was characterized by a fervent conviction in progress, primarily defined by the accumulation of wealth, the ethos of utilitarianism, and admiration for individuals who achieved success through their efforts, epitomized by the concept of the “self-made man.” 1 In the late nineteenth century, the rise of modern cities was the central phenomenon in American history. Cities converted the once comparatively uncomplicated, agrarian nation reminiscent of Jefferson’s era into a complex, intricate, contemporary society.2 Despite society's rapid growth, sentiments of apprehension and uncertainty existed regarding the trajectory of American culture. Many looked back nostalgically and idealistically to a previous 1 Robert Sayre and Michael Löwy, Romantic Anti-Capitalism and Nature: The Enchanted Garden (London: Routledge, 2019), 42, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429293535. 2 Peter J Schmitt, Back to Nature: The Arcadian Myth in Urban America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969), vii. 4 era when different values had dominated.3 This earlier era that people are nostalgic about was characterized by people engaging in hands-on work, predominantly farming, and where the landscape remained untouched by industrialization. This nostalgia gave rise to the suburban ideal, which provided a fundamental link between democracy and rural living.4 The aspiration for a connection with nature and the dream of country living was increasingly held by the rising middle class. However, according to Archer and Blau, the middle class underwent significant changes. The middle class transitioned from skilled artisans and merchants to a more diverse group, including clerical, technical, and managerial workers, entrepreneurs, and retailers.5 This evolution reflects the changes in the economic landscape in the late nineteenth century, which was marked by the rise of managerial capitalism and the expansion of opportunities beyond traditional crafts and trade. Doell’s book provides a concrete example of individuals from rural backgrounds transitioning to urban life to pursue opportunities in small business ownership, which was opening a grocery store.6 This example illustrates that the composition of the middle class has expanded to encompass not only traditional artisans but also newcomers and immigrants seeking economic prosperity in urban or suburban settings. Living Beyond the City Limits The rapid development of modern metropolises reconstructed the physical landscape of urban dwellers and redefined their institutional structures. Furthermore, it fundamentally transforms city 3 Sayre and Löwy, Romantic Anti-Capitalism and Nature, 42. 4 Margaret S. Marsh, Suburban Lives (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990), xiii. 5 Melanie Archer and Judith R. Blau, “Class Formation in Nineteenth-Century America: The Case of the Middle Class,” Annual Review of Sociology 19 (1993): 35–36. 6 M. Christine Klim Doell, “Gardens of the Gilded Age,” in Gardens of the Gilded Age, Nineteenth-Century Gardens and Homegrounds of New York State (Syracuse University Press, 1986), 100, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv64h7jw.4. 5 dwellers’ perception of the natural world beyond the city limits.7 Suburbanization emerged as a response to this transformation. Complicated factors, including America’s rural heritage, which traditionally made its citizens antipathetic to urban life, and the clear need for more residential space, became parts of the driving force for suburbanization.8 Notably, the suburban ideal emerged as a spatial representation of the agrarian community. While owning a suburban house didn’t necessarily turn the individual into a farmer, it did provide them closer proximity to nature compared to residing in an urban townhouse.9 In terms of the suburbanization of New York, migration to Brooklyn is an outstanding example. Between 1820 and 1830, the population soared by 64 percent. Faced with this rapid growth, residents of New York sought relief by relocating to Brooklyn, which was notably more accessible by ferry to lower Manhattan, the heart of the central city during that period, than many areas of Manhattan itself.10 Real estate developers accelerated the migration to the suburbs like Brooklyn. The developer of Brooklyn Heights, Hezekiah Beers Pierrepont, strategically targeted his advertisements toward affluent businessmen from Manhattan. His promotions underscored the comparative affordability and salubrious environs of Brooklyn Heights. He depicted that “Gentlemen whose business or profession require daily attendance into the city cannot better, or with less expense, secure the health and comfort of their families.”11 The advertisement presented a new lifestyle option for the middle class who couldn’t afford a comfortable mansion in the city, offering an affordable solution in the suburbs. By 1841, approximately 50 percent of household heads had relocated to plots to Brooklyn sold by Pierrepont.12 7 Schmitt, Back to Nature, viii. 8 Marsh, Suburban Lives, 2–3. 9 Marsh, xiii. 10 Marsh, 3. 11 Marsh, 3. 12 Marsh, 3. 6 Moreover, technology was an integral factor in nineteenth-century suburbanization. By 1848, suburban railroads had made country cottages feasible, challenging “antiquated conceptions of time and space” and enabling urban citizens to enjoy the luxuries of nature in the verdant countryside.13 Advancements in transportation and communication posed a potential challenge to the conventional boundary between urban and rural lifestyles.14 Americans could now experience the best of both environments. While they had the opportunity to work in the cities, they preferred to reside in the country, where a healthy lifestyle could be achieved through restful country activities, a better diet, and outdoor exercise.15 Media, Marketing, and the Suburban Dream Apart from the impact of real estate and advancements in transportation, from the 1880s through the 1920s, American middle-class journalists endeavored to merge the charms of country living with the sophistication of urban culture in essays crafted to resonate with city-dwelling readers. Notably, these writers are mainly college professors, merchants, and clerks. They are individuals with decidedly urban inclinations. Their works were trying to transform rural America into the recreational haven of an urbanized society.16 Influenced by journals, books, magazines, and arts of the era, the ”Arcadian myth” became deeply ingrained in the lifestyles and thoughts of a significant segment of the urban middle and upper classes, which is a blend of therapeutic release and longing for a 13 David M. Tucker, Kitchen Gardening in America: A History, 1. ed (Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1993), 70. 14 Doell, “Gardens of the Gilded Age.” 15 Tucker, Kitchen Gardening in America, 71. 16 Schmitt, Back to Nature, xviii. 7 bygone era.17 Andrew Jackson Downing expressed this sentiment when he wrote, “Happy is he who lives this life of a cultivated mind in the country!”18 The architectural pattern books of the 1870s resonated with the voices of prominent Americans like Downing. Most notable was Englishman John Ruskin. Known for inspiring the popularity of Gothic Revival architecture, Ruskin is considered the progenitor of the Arts and Crafts movement. Builders and architects in high Victorian America held Ruskin in high esteem, frequently quoting him in their work. Interestingly, scholars note that Ruskin’s influence was more pronounced in the United States than in his native England. Like Downing, he championed the virtues of rural life over the perceived vices of urban living.19 The messages of these social reformers led the middle and upper class to move into suburban homes. As Robert Van Court elucidated in 1912, “To those of us who live and work amid the artificiality of city life, there is something irresistibly attractive in the idea of being close to the heart of nature, wearing old clothes and living for a time the free and easy life which we like to imagine was lived before the call of the city became insistent.”20 The romanticized portrayal of country living within the middle class reflected a cultural longing for a bygone era. It also underscored the complex interplay between the development of metropolises, suburbanization, media influence, and the reconstruction of American virtue during this transformative period. Moreover, both the ideology of domesticity and the suburban ideal endeavored 17 Schmitt, viii. 18 Andrew Jackson Downing, The Architecture of Country Houses: Including Designs for Cottages, Farm Houses, and Villas, with Remarks on Interiors, Furniture, and the Best Modes of Warming and Ventilating (D. Appleton & Company, 1852), 258. 19 Marsh, Suburban Lives, 24. 20 Schmitt, Back to Nature, viii. 8 to reinterpret the values of the early republic in response to the requirements of a burgeoning commercial and industrial society in the nineteenth century.21 In the final years of the nineteenth century and the early decades of the twentieth- century, a new mode of suburban living emerged, characterized by a reconfiguration of domestic ideology. This new mode no longer relied on a strict division between masculine and feminine spheres of engagement. A pivotal aspect of this shift was the emergence of “masculine domesticity,” encompassing new beliefs regarding men’s roles within the household. This encouraged husbands to assume greater responsibility for their children’s emotional well-being, prioritize leisure time with their spouses over male companions, and even undertake limited domestic tasks.22 The prioritization of leisure time with family became an important factor in the emergence of kitchen gardens in the nineteenth- century, which will be discussed later in this chapter. For middle-class individuals tired of urban life and seeking a taste of country living, acquiring a suburban home with just half an acre to four or five acres of land could provide ample space to enjoy the finer aspects of rural living. According to Frank Jessup Scott’s book, in the suburbs of most cities catering to populations ranging from five to fifty thousand, reasonably priced plots were available within convenient walking distance of downtown. Individuals with similar interests and their families can even acquire properties and arrange their developments nearby, thereby enjoying the pleasures of country life and some of the scenic beauty of parklands, all while retaining the conveniences of urban living.23 With the development of suburban areas and the increasing affordability of suburban homes, increasingly middle-class individuals began to follow this trend. With the industrial development in 21 Marsh, Suburban Lives, xiii. 22 Marsh, xiv. 23 Frank Jesup Scott, The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds of Small Extent (New York: American Book Exchange, 1881), 29, http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006852235. 9 the late nineteenth century, Thomas Towndrow created a manual which was about how to obtain suburban homes located within a radius of fifty miles of the Great Metropolis. It included illustrations of home design, floor plans, and construction costs. The book encouraged young people to acquire a suburban home.24 Living in suburban homes allowed middle and upper-class people to leverage the economic advantages they obtained and accessed in urban areas while enjoying the natural environment surrounding them without needing to engage in farming for a living, unlike those living in rural areas. From Rural to Suburban The migration from urban to suburban areas also took place in small cities. One illustration of this is Chester F. Wickwire of Cortland, New York. He left the family farm to establish a business in town. Despite moving to a suburban environment, Wickwire maintained aspects of rural life, such as cultivating a garden for vegetables and fruit near his home.25 This highlights how individuals from rural backgrounds brought their agricultural traditions with them as they adapted to new suburban living. This significant transition demonstrates how the middle class has expanded beyond traditional urban professions to include individuals with rural backgrounds who integrate agricultural practices into their suburban lifestyles. 24 Thomas Towndrow, Suburban Homes: How to Obtain Them: Towndrow’s New and Comprehensive Plan of Association by Which Persons of Limited Means May Acquire Desirable Suburban Homes . (New York: T. Towndrow, 1875), 3. 25 Doell, “Gardens of the Gilded Age,” 46. 10 Romanticism in Suburban America The transition from urban to suburban areas is motivated by the desire for closer interaction with nature. Consequently, the aesthetics of suburban homes and gardens are undoubtedly intertwined with people’s expectations of suburban life. The aesthetics that emerged in the United States was due to the wave of Romanticism and the landscape style derived from Romanticism, also known as Romantic Movement. Romantic literature, art, and ideology gradually infiltrated the American psyche, catalyzing a shift in the perception and portrayal of nature. The emotionally laden representations of natural landscapes in art and literature, coupled with heightened recreational exploration across the untamed territories of the Americas, underscored an emerging belief in the physical and psychological healing capabilities inherent in the natural world.26 In terms of Romanticism, Thomas Cole has to be pointed out. He is widely acclaimed as a prominent figure in nineteenth-century American art and revered as the accomplished founder of the Hudson River School of landscape painting.27 In the social context of Thomas Cole’s famous pieces such as “View from Mount Holyoke, Northampton, Massachusetts, After A Thunderstorm (The Oxbow)”, which was completed in 1836, various developments such as industrialization, urbanization, aggressive expansion, and commercial exploitation of land imposed significant strain on the natural environment in affected regions. These developments resulted in the alteration and disfigurement of landscapes and detrimental effects on ecosystems.28 26 Paige Doerner, “Romanticism and Ruralism: Changing Nineteenth Century American Perceptions of the Natural World,” The Spectrum: A Scholars Day Journal 3 (2015): 3. 27 Sayre and Löwy, Romantic Anti-Capitalism and Nature, 41. 28 Sayre and Löwy, 42. 11 In the discerning analysis of scholars like Frances Dunwell, Cole’s works and the Hudson River School served as a clarion call for the preservation and reverence of natural beauty. Additionally, Cole elevated natural beauty to a point of national pride and identity, igniting a nationwide passion for American landscapes.29 The Picturesque and John Claudius Loudon The Picturesque, an influential aesthetic category associated with Romanticism, started earlier but peaked in Britain at the turn of the nineteenth century. The Picturesque originated from the notion of creating landscapes that resembled images. 30 In the late nineteenth century, the aesthetic of suburban homes, regardless of interior, exterior, or garden, was profoundly influenced by the English landscape design principle and trending, making picturesque aesthetics a dominant trend in suburban design. John Claudius Loudon played a significant role in developing the picturesque trend. As an English landscape gardener and highly productive horticultural writer, Loudon asserted in his 1826 publication “An Encyclopedia of Gardening” that no strict rule existed for achieving a picturesque landscape. He noted that the landscape could be deemed picturesque if it possessed qualities that made it suitable for depiction as a commendable painting. 31 His publication also depicted the pleasures homeowners could derive from working alongside their children in their gardens. 32 29 Sayre and Löwy, 57. 30 National Gallery of Art, “Picturesque - History of Early American Landscape Design,” accessed March 20, 2024, https://heald.nga.gov/mediawiki/index.php/Picturesque#cite_ref-30. 31 J. C. Loudon, An Encyclopædia of Gardening, 4th ed. (London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown and Green, 1826), 1000, https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.69191. 32 J. C. (John Claudius) Loudon, The Suburban Gardener, and Villa Companion (New York: Garland Pub., 1982), 20, http://archive.org/details/suburbangardene00loudgoog. 12 Loudon’s portrayal of suburban life encapsulated the American middle class’s idealized vision of suburban living. While John Claudius Loudon was renowned in America, his works were primarily limited to a discussion of lands in Great Britain and were not extensively adapted to the American landscape. Therefore, when Loudon’s writing was published, it inspired horticulturists like Andrew Jackson Downing, who emerged as a prominent figure in nineteenth-century American landscape gardening. Downing adapted Loudon’s thoughts to suit the American context, drawing inspiration from Loudon’s ideas and design principles and becoming a leading figure in developing well-designed suburban homes and gardens in the United States. Andrew Jackson Downing and Beyond In the nineteenth century, enthusiasm for enhancing home surroundings was not reserved for wealthy people. Garden critics emphasized that cultivating good taste in gardens primarily revolved around suitability and appropriateness rather than the sheer wealth or size of the property. Consequently, even owners of more modest residences, whether in urban or rural settings, were motivated to enhance their properties, regardless of their scale. 33 As Loudon mentioned in his publication in 1838, The Suburban Gardener and Villa Companion, the pleasures of living in suburban areas mostly depend on understanding the potential benefits such as uncontaminated fresh air and enjoyment from gardening that even a small garden may offer. 34 He underscored the affordability of suburban living for those interested in gardening. 33 Doell, “Gardens of the Gilded Age,” 9. 34 Loudon, The Suburban Gardener, and Villa Companion, 1. 13 Moreover, while Downing admired the idyllic English country lifestyle, he recognized that certain social and political elements contributing to it were incompatible with republican America. Factors such as the entrenched tradition of hereditary privilege and a societal division of labor enabling access to domestic services could not be replicated. Downing pointed out that the wealth of the English landed aristocracy and the vast scale of their estates elevated houses and gardens to a level far surpassing those in America.35 Downing understood that the English examples were not directly applicable or feasible in the American context. Andrew Jackson Downing described himself as “a man born on the banks of one of the noblest and most fruitful rivers in America... whose best days have been spent in gardens and orchards.”36 Andrew Jackson Downing always had an interest in improving grounds and gardens. At the time Downing stayed in Newburgh initially to manage the family nursery, later to construct a residence and carry out horticultural experiments on his four and a half acres, and ultimately to dedicate himself 35 Judith K Major, To Live in the New World: A.J. Downing and American Landscape Gardening (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1997), 103. 36 Major, 3. Figure 1: Residence of Andrew Jackson Downing, Newburgh, New York. (Judith K Major, 1997.) 14 to writing and his landscape gardening and architectural pursuits. He lived and worked within the landscape style he championed, an American adaptation of the British picturesque style.37 Indeed, Andrew Jackson Downing’s work was exceptionally popular and influential. The preface of the second edition of Andrew Jackson Downing’s A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening Adapted to North America expressed his satisfaction with the favorable reception of the first edition and the prevailing keen interest in rural enhancement. Downing saw this as a promising sign for the future. He had elevated expectations for the next twenty years, believing that their efforts in cultivating a national sensibility in Landscape Gardening and Architecture would mirror the rapid population growth and overall prosperity. Downing emphasized that those who recognized the profound impact of “country homes” on a nation’s well-being would duly appreciate the moral and social significance of such advancements in taste. 38 The popularity of his work indicates the trend of landscape gardening and beautifying homes in the era. However, in A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening, Adapted to North America, the country residences Downing portrayed were often deemed too perfect and idealistic, making them impractical for all but a select few Americans. Recognizing this limitation and desiring to reach a broader audience, Downing later focused on championing republican simplicity and frugality in the journal Horticulturalist. He emphasized the optimal utilization of the country’s existing natural landscape, particularly the native plants. 37 Major, 3–4. 38 A. J. (Andrew Jackson) Downing, A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening, Adapted to North America; with a View to the Improvement of Country Residences. Comprising Historical Notices and General Principles of the Art, Directions for Laying out Gardens and Arranging Plantations, the Description and Cultivation of Hardy Trees, Decorative Accompaniments to the House and Grounds, the Formation of Pieces of Artificial Water, Flower Gardens, Etc., with Remarks on Rural Architecture (New York, London, Wiley and Putnam, 1844), http://archive.org/details/treatiseont00down. 15 The Horticulturalist aimed for more attainable goals, focusing on modest establishments. Downing sought to instill in his readers a concept of landscape gardening shaped by the economic realities of America, considering the limited resources of the majority and the high labor cost.39 During the earlier period of Horticulturalist ’s establishment, the journal listed many beautiful garden examples to attract readers’ attention. These examples ranged from rural cottages to expansive American pleasure grounds and even included renowned estates like Chatsworth, maintained by the substantial income of the greatest dukes in Great Britain.40 The inclusion of Chatsworth was not intended solely to advertise that only aristocratic proprietors could engage in gardening but rather sought to alleviate any envy provoked by Chatsworth by juxtaposing the contentment derived from gardening between a wealthy nobleman and a modest cultivator. Downing emphasized that a modest cultivator would find greater fulfillment in the few fruits and flowers meticulously tended and nurtured by their own hands, seeing it as a profound personal investment that brought joy to “the possessor of a small, dearly prized garden.”41 Moreover, early in Downing’s A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening, Adapted to North America, he briefly touched upon the domestic and social contentment derived from country life and the pursuit of rural arts in its 1841 preface. Later, he delved into the moral enhancement of individuals, families, communities, and the nation as a direct consequence of beautiful surroundings in The Horticulturalist.42 Downing’s belief and advocacy echoed Thomas Cole’s works’ core, elevating natural beauty to a point of national pride and identity. The 39 Major, To Live in the New World, 105. 40 Major, 106. 41 Major, 107. 42 Major, 105. 16 Horticulturist boasted the largest circulation of any magazine within its category in America within two years of its establishment.43 Middle-class individuals enjoyed the contrast between suburban and urban areas. They felt much closer to nature and healthier living in suburban areas while still being able to access the familiar urban life. Unlike rural residents, they did not need to worry about the productivity of the crops they grew. Instead, they could enjoy the pure pleasure of gardening. Gardening for them was exercise, a fashion statement, a trend, an unparalleled experience, and a way to connect with nature and the land. Emergence of Kitchen Gardens The nineteenth century in America marked the transition of common Americans from aristocratic proprietors of expansive country estates to individuals of average means intrigued by gardens and horticulture.44 Urban-to-suburban migration, an aspiration for rural lifestyles, and a nostalgic longing for farming significantly influenced gardening practices. Publishing information in books, journals, periodicals, and magazines fueled this influence. It resulted in a noticeable trend in kitchen gardening mainly among segments of the middle and upper-middle-class. Individuals seeking to reconnect with nature and achieve a healthier lifestyle saw the limits of industrialization. The concern over pollution in the city and the desire to provide a healthier growth environment for children led some families to move to the suburbs and grow their food. As early as 1806, The American Gardener’s Calendar affirmed the link between health and gardening. With its numerous advantageous and healthful qualities, country life in America inevitably became fashionable even 43 Major, 205. 44 Doell, “Gardens of the Gilded Age.” 17 among city dwellers. 45 Engaging in kitchen gardening became evident for people embracing a country lifestyle. The Horticulturalist pledged to celebrate “all fruitful and luxuriant grounds” while focusing on “the humblest cottage kitchen garden, as well as the most extended pleasure grounds.”46 Downing promoted diverse gardens, encouraging the public to start gardening for the family, the neighborhood, and even their country. The kitchen garden was one of the kind he advocated in his design. Society was also influenced by some literature that depicted a lifestyle in the books wherein individuals grew fresh vegetables at home, often associated with relocating from a city dwelling to a house with the surrounding land.47 For individuals looking to start gardening or explore more about gardening, the nineteenth century offered a plethora of publications. New York State served as a hub for a vibrant horticultural press. For a relatively modest fee, individuals such as farmers, homeowners, and hobbyists could subscribe to publications like The Horticulturist, the American Agriculturist, the Genesee Farmer, the Albany Cultivator, or Moore’s Rural New Yorker and Country Gentleman.48 Additionally, useful garden manuals were available for the public to learn about kitchen gardening, published by the Shakers, renowned as some of the most proficient farmers in the United States during the nineteenth century.49 The Shakers were enthusiastic about sharing their expertise in agriculture with others. 45 Tucker, Kitchen Gardening in America. 46 Major, To Live in the New World, 106. 47 Scott, The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds of Small Extent, 23. 48 Doell, “Gardens of the Gilded Age,” 9. 49 Chelsea Fisher, “Towards a Dialogue of Sustainable Agriculture and End-Times Theology in the United States: Insights from the Historical Ecology of Nineteenth Century Millennial Communes,” Agriculture and Human Values 35, no. 4 (December 1, 2018): 791–807, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-9874-4. 18 Seed Industry Influence In the nineteenth century, the booming seed industry gave people access to various vegetables and herbs. Religion also had a connection with the seed industry. In the late eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century, on the East Coast, gardeners around major cities could acquire seeds from commercial dealers. However, availability was restricted to rural towns due to inadequate mail service and transportation. Rural area dwellers sometimes depended on the Shakers as their primary resource.50 The Shakers were renowned as some of the most proficient farmers in the United States during the nineteenth century.51 Their tradition of meticulously saving the best seeds for future planting led them to establish the first seed distributor, which provided farmers across North America with top- quality seeds throughout the nineteenth century.52 Their seed packets were sold door to door, village to village, or consigned to retailers. For much of the first half of the nineteenth century, the Shakers controlled the American seed business by distributing their products to rural areas.53 By the 1830s and 1840s, numerous commercial seed businesses became established. Influenced by the availability of superior Shaker seeds and increasing knowledge of biology, some seed dealers began cultivating their seeds. 54 The seed industry flourished in the nineteenth century due to competition between commercial seed businesses and the Shakers. Customers could access diverse seeds of vegetables and herbs, making it easier to cultivate various plants in their kitchen gardens. 50 Laura Paine, “Hands to Work, Hearts to God: The Story of the Shaker Seed Industry,” HortTechnology 3, no. 4 (October 1, 1993): 377, https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.3.4.375. 51 Fisher, “Towards a Dialogue of Sustainable Agriculture and End-Times Theology in the United States,” 794. 52 Edward Deming Andrews, The People Called Shakers: A Search for the Perfect Society, New enl. ed. (New York: Dover Publications, 1963). 53 Paine, “Hands to Work, Hearts to God,” 378. 54 Paine, 379. 19 Unique Experience for Middle and Upper Classes Frank Jesup Scott provided an extreme example of a wealthy businessman, who was obsessed with gardening, hosting a dinner for friends at his countryside estate. His guests praised the delicious green corn served, to which he proudly responded, “It comes from my land, and based on a recent calculation, I estimate that the total cost for this season’s crop will amount to only ten dollars per year.”55 Scott argued that a spacious kitchen garden ranked among the most expensive among all the lavish amenities for a businessman’s residence. Good housewives and masters invested more money in cultivating radishes, lettuce, peas, beans, and even relatively inexpensive items like cabbages and potatoes than purchasing similar quality produce. Additionally, they could maintain a lawn adorned with beautiful plants and flowers for the same amount spent on garden vegetables.56 Maintaining a kitchen garden was a significant investment for some families. However, as Armitage indicated in the book on the nature study movement, individuals from the middle and upper classes in America were driven by a desire to acquire experiences that were considered unique and irreplaceable.57 This echoes the instance Scott offered, where the middle and upper classes enjoyed showing off the unique homegrown vegetables they produced. The Changing Ethnicity in Growing and Gardening The practice of kitchen gardening bore significant connections to ethnic roots. Andrew Jackson Downing asserted that Americans shared ancestral ties with the British and exerted considerable 55 Scott, The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds of Small Extent, 23. 56 Scott, 23. 57 Kevin C Armitage, The Nature Study Movement: The Forgotten Popularizer of America’s Conservation Ethic (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2009), 37. 20 effort to persuade his readers that they possessed the same predisposition towards gardening and outdoor activities as their reputed ancestors. In his typical fashion, his declaration in July 1848 stated: “Alongside other attributes of the Anglo-Saxon psyche, we [Americans] have certainly inherited that keen appreciation of rural beauty and the ability to cultivate it, a quality that the English have long exemplified.” Other inherited traits consistently mentioned included a fondness for country life and a reverence for nature.58 In terms of immigration in America, by the late nineteenth century, waves of immigrants continued to increase the population and change food preferences. For example, Italian immigrants began arriving in America carrying a rich culinary tradition deeply rooted in their homeland. Among their gastronomic preferences was the consumption of eggplant, artichoke, broccoli, zucchini, and an array of herbs such as thyme, oregano, basil, and garlic. Motivated to maintain their cultural identity and sustain the flavors of their native cuisine, Italian immigrants embraced kitchen gardening with fervor. In addition, the German immigrants brought their food preferences for potatoes, cabbage, and other spices. These immigrant groups participated to varying degrees in vacant lot programs and settled on the outskirts of American urban areas, where they cultivated their vegetables.59 For these immigrants, gardening was more than just a practical endeavor; it represented a tangible link to their heritage, providing a sense of continuity and stability amidst social change. By nurturing their plots of land and preserving traditional growing methods, they sought to imbue their new surroundings with their homeland's familiar sights, scents, and flavors. In doing so, they sustained their culinary traditions and fostered a sense of well-being and belonging in a foreign land where established customs could be continued.60 58 Major, To Live in the New World, 137. 59 Tucker, Kitchen Gardening in America, 113. 60 Tucker, 113. 21 Contents of Nineteenth-Century Kitchen Gardens In suburban homes, the kitchen garden was typically considered part of the service area, often blending with other ornamental features. Downing advocated for a fundamental principle in ensuring the success of a country property: the necessity of delineating a clear division between the living or “ornamental portion of the place,” as he termed it, and the service portion. He emphasized that this division should be established first in the house’s design and then extended to the grounds. The kitchen facilities should face the service side of the house, where other practical components such as stables, barns, and the kitchen garden should also be situated. Furthermore, he recommended separating this service area and the ornamental or residential section using belts or plantations of trees and shrubbery.61 Frank Jesup Scott showcases a plan for a compact house and stable on a corner lot in the book The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds of Small Extent. Notably, a kitchen garden is situated at the corner of the lot. Scott emphasizes the plan's utilitarian features, highlighting the kitchen garden's practicality and integration with the overall decorative effect. The arched openings within the grape trellis provide access to the paths of the kitchen- garden for the family, while a separate walk, accessible from the washroom and the back veranda, serves for work and the use of servants. This arrangement ensures that the vegetable garden remains completely concealed from the house and every corner of the grounds yet maintains an adequately open exposure and conveniently near the kitchen.62 61 Harold Hill Blossom, “Andrew Jackson Downing Landscape Architect,” The American Magazine of Art 8, no. 7 (1917): 267. 62 Scott, The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds of Small Extent, 135. 22 Figure 2: Plan of a Compact House and Stable on a Corner Lot 128 x 220 feet. (Frank Jesup Scott, 1881.) 23 The Plants The tomato was a curious vegetable gradually gaining attention in the nineteenth century. Cultivating tomatoes in Western New York can be traced back to 1825 when seeds from Virginia were first introduced. However, it wasn’t until 1830 that horticulturists specializing in vegetable cultivation within the Albany region began to grow tomatoes. It’s worth noting that guidelines for tomato cultivation were already available in Thorburn’s Gardeners’ Kalendar, 2nd edition, published in New York in 1817. The tomato was initially regarded with significant disapproval as a culinary ingredient. Nonetheless, for ten years, a range of treatments, including tablets and panaceas, began to incorporate tomato extracts.63 During the mid-nineteenth century, there was a notable surge in gathering knowledge regarding tomatoes. According to Mr. T. S. Gold, the Connecticut Board of Agriculture secretary, growing tomatoes in Connecticut began around 1832, initially driven by curiosity rather than practicality. However, even though knowledge of the French cultivation of tomatoes was acknowledged, no tangible application of this agricultural produce was actively explored at that time.64 In 1835, as reported by The Farmer, one person is mentioned as having planted a large quantity of tomatoes to make sauce.65 The book The American Frugal Housewife indicates that the best kind of ketchup is made from tomatoes. Tomato ketchup was suggested to be added to various dishes, including fricasseed chicken, curry fowl, fish chowder, and beef soup.66 In summary, the culinary use of tomatoes in America did not predate the present century and only became widespread around 1835 to 1840. By 1883, sixty-four named varieties were grown at 63 E. Lewis Sturtevant, “Kitchen Garden Esculents of American Origin. III. (Continued),” The American Naturalist 19, no. 7 (1885): 658–69. 64 Sturtevant. 65 Sturtevant. 66 Lydia Maria Child, The American Frugal Housewife, 12th ed., enlarged and corrected (Bedford, MA: Applewood Books, 1989). 24 the New York Agricultural Experiment Station, and among them, over fifty could be considered sufficiently distinct for garden purposes.67 The tomato’s journey to popularity in the nineteenth century was gradual, marked by a fascinating interplay of cultural influences. The tomato itself is a vegetable with a complex and diverse cultural background. Its origins can be traced back to South America, where it was first cultivated. From there, it found its way to Europe, where it took root and became an integral part of European cuisines, particularly in Italy. However, when tomatoes were introduced to the United States, they didn’t immediately capture the public’s attention. They were met with a degree of skepticism and hesitation.68 One of the factors that changed the tomato’s popularity in America was the influence of Italian immigrants. As they settled in the U.S. during the late nineteenth century, they brought their cherished tomato varieties and introduced their unique ways of incorporating tomatoes into various dishes. They also introduced the tradition of canning or jarring tomatoes. Many immigrants sought products that evoke memories of home, and the practice and tradition of canning tomatoes proved the perfect solution. Conclusion With the rapid societal changes brought about by industrialization in America, nostalgia for agrarian life and the suburban ideal emerged. Romanticism significantly influenced this trend of living in suburban homes. Under the influence of suburban home and garden design leader Andrew Jackson Downing, maintaining kitchen gardens became popular. The rising middle and upper classes 67 Sturtevant, “Kitchen Garden Esculents of American Origin. III. (Continued).” 68 Sturtevant. 25 aspired to a vision of country living, and keeping a kitchen garden became a symbol of status, reflecting their social standing and individual passions. Additionally, severe air pollution problems in urban areas prompted these individuals to move to suburban regions to address health concerns, particularly for their children. The subsequent chapter will explore how the dream of country living and the nostalgia for agrarian life were linked to the Country Life Movement and the Nature Study Movement in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These movements emphasized children's education during a period marked by a notable migration of rural populations into urban areas, while many middle- and upper-class individuals moved to suburban areas. These movements continued the mid-nineteenth-century trend of kitchen gardening, encouraging people to connect with nature, promote health, and learn through firsthand experiences. 26 CHAPTER TWO - THE COUNTRY LIFE MOVEMENT AND EDUCATIONAL REFORM Introduction While many individuals moved from urban areas to suburbs, it’s important to note that these were typically middle or upper-class. In Thoreau’s Walden, he used the word “misfortune” to describe his fellow townsfolk who inherited farms, houses, barns, cattle, and farming equipment. He stated that this inheritance was burdensome because these assets were easier to acquire than to divest. However, for those without inheritance, it was challenging to raise enough to feed themselves.69 Compared to the middle- and upper-class individuals who aspired to engage in agricultural pursuits, there was a massive internal migration of rural populations into cities, driven by exhaustion with farming and country living. They sought alternative means of livelihood due to the rapid development of transportation systems and technology. In 1880, most of the population worked in agriculture, but by 1910, less than one-third of the nation was engaged in agriculture.70 This phenomenon gave rise to the country life movement, wherein supporters aimed to improve the rural environment and the quality of country living to encourage people to stay in rural areas. In contrast to the growers, farmers, and ranchers, many individuals were interested in country life reform. They were motivated by their belief in the “yeoman myth,”71 described by William L. Bowers, echoed in Peter J. Schmitt’s work Back to Nature, which sees this belief as an Arcadian myth in urban America. These individuals believed that farmers epitomized the finest qualities of society: they were seen as hardworking, intelligent, and law-abiding individuals. Most reformers 69 Henry David Thoreau, Walden (Boston: Beacon Press, 2004), 11, http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=715802. 70 William L Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920 (Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1974), 3. 71 Bowers, 4. 27 aimed to create a situation where the ideals and values of rural life could endure in a rapidly urbanizing world. They were not advocating for a return to a primitive agricultural economy; rather, they sought to preserve agrarian society's social and political virtues while embracing the material benefits of industrial changes.72 This chapter explores the educational aspects of the Country Life Movement and its relationship to the Nature-Study Movement. It provides an overview of the leading proponents before examining their effect on the school garden movement in both urban and rural contexts. Educational reformers such as Friedrich Fröbel, John Dewey, and Wilbur Jackman provided a foundational pedagogy for the rise of school gardens in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They emphasized the importance of integrating nature into traditional teaching and exposing children to natural resources through the development of school gardens. The Country Life Movement There were two major categories of the Country Life movement supporters. One of the categories included individuals who regarded farming as a business venture, advocating for efficient and profitable operations. This perspective was championed by urban businessmen, leaders of emerging farm organizations, and some farmers supportive of country life initiatives. They believed that improving farm life primarily involved promoting scientific methods, increasing capital investment, seeking additional government assistance, and organizing for economic gains. They argued that any social challenges faced by farmers could be resolved through increased income.73 72 Bowers, 4. 73 Bowers, 28. 28 The other group of supporters viewed farming as a way of life, considering farmers inherently superior due to their close connection to the land and nature. This viewpoint was predominantly held by academics from land grant colleges, individuals affiliated with rural schools and churches, and urban social workers. They emphasized the importance of social development in rural life, believing that certain factors transcended economic and technical considerations. They were convinced that the ultimate salvation of the farm population lay in moral and social advancement rather than solely in material prosperity.74 However, it’s essential to recognize that their focus on extolling the virtues of rural living did not necessarily translate into tangible economic benefits for individuals or families relying on the agricultural industry. While these reformers sought to preserve the cultural ethos of agrarian society, their efforts often fell short in addressing the pressing economic challenges agricultural communities face. While noble in its intentions, the romanticization of rural life sometimes overlooked the harsh economic realities confronting those whose livelihoods depended on agricultural pursuits. Education played a pivotal role in the Country Life movement. Most advocates for the country life movement strongly believed in the efficacy of education, particularly agricultural education, which they saw as the most effective means to revitalize rural society. They emphasized the importance of rural schools providing knowledge that was both practical and relevant to individuals’ lives, instilling in boys and girls a sense of joy and fulfillment in rural living. They advocated for educational content that showcased how intellectual growth, cultural enrichment, and personal satisfaction could be achieved within the context of country life.75 In this vein, educational initiatives such as nature study and the establishment of school gardens or school farms in America served as the tangible embodiments of their educational philosophy. 74 Bowers, 28. 75 Bowers, 4–5. 29 Education Reformers and the Nature-Study Movement The concept of school gardens can be traced to 1840 when Friedrich Fröbel established Kindergartens for German preschoolers. 76 Friedrich Fröbel emphasized the significance of establishing a close bond and connection with nature in fostering the growth of children, shaping human education, and guiding the development of societies and humanity at large.77 Fröbel illustrated how gardening can influence children as human beings in his work. He pointed out that the human being, particularly the child, must be acknowledged and treated as an individual entity and understood as a part of a larger collective existence from an early stage. The child must recognize and demonstrate this interconnectedness through their actions. Nowhere is this reciprocal interaction between the individual and the collective, the part and the whole, more beautifully and tangibly illustrated than in the collaborative cultivation of plants through the shared care of a garden. The school garden, which was called the house garden by Fröbel, allows each child to have their designated space within their little garden plot, thus facilitating their engagement in this collective endeavor.78 Friedrich Fröbel’s concept of school gardens provided a blueprint for reformers of the country life movement and the nature study movement, inspiring them to initiate new agricultural educational methods. Compared to Fröbel, John Dewey became much better known due to his extensive writing and teaching in the United States. Dewey’s essay about education in Utopia introduced the idea that education should occur without the formal structures typically associated with schools. Children are 76 Tucker, Kitchen Gardening in America, 109. 77 Friedrich Fröbel, Friedrich Froebel’s Education by Development: The Second Part of the Pedagogics of the Kindergarten (New York: D. Appleton, 1899), 217, http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001281264. 78 Fröbel, 218. 30 brought together by older, more experienced individuals who guide their endeavors and activities.79 During the 1890s, John Dewey introduced comprehensive concepts for integrating schools with society.80 Dewey advocated the mode of school called progressive schools, which heavily rely on students' active engagement and participation. In these schools, the extensive collaboration among students and between students and teachers is one of the keys. Teachers are viewed more as collaborators or fellow workers than authoritative figures. The discipline in these schools is characterized by an emphasis on self-discipline wherever possible, nurtured through shared responsibilities in work and recreational activities that hold common interests for all involved.81 Dewey also believed that the school building ought to have a natural environment, which could include a garden. He thought that children's experiences in the garden would lead them to explore surrounding fields and venture into the wider country. 82 Dewey’s views were reflected in the laboratory school sponsored by the University of Chicago, where he taught and conducted his research. The Scammon Garden of the laboratory school was designated as a location for school gardening.83 79 John Dewey, Eric Thomas Weber, and Eric Thomas Weber, America’s Public Philosopher: Essays on Social Justice, Economics, Education, and the Future of Democracy (New York, UNITED STATES: Columbia University Press, 2021), 122, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cornell/detail.action?docID=6146935. 80 Sally Gregory Kohlstedt, “‘A Better Crop of Boys and Girls’: The School Gardening Movement, 1890–1920,” History of Education Quarterly 48, no. 1 (2008): 58, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5959.2008.00126.x. 81 Dewey, Weber, and Weber, America’s Public Philosopher, 142. 82 John Dewey, The School and Society: Being Three Lectures (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1899), 89, http://archive.org/details/schoolsociety00deweuoft. 83 “Transforming Education,” accessed July 16, 2024, https://www.ucls.uchicago.edu/post-detail/~board/125- anniversary/post/transforming-education. 31 In 1880, Progressive G. Stanley Hall, a psychologist at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts, conducted a study documenting the urban environment's detrimental impact on children’s development. Hall’s “The Content of Children’s Minds Upon Entering School” research revealed that children raised in urban settings exhibited a profound lack of understanding regarding natural phenomena. They struggled to comprehend basic concepts such as the seasons and could not identify common trees or animals, among other deficiencies. Hall indicated that without exposure to nature, childhood could never reach its full potential and would instead be marred by a departure from the values of pastoral America. He warned of the potential consequences, including an inclination towards “hoodlumism, juvenile crime, and secret vice.”84 84 Brian Trelstad, “Little Machines in Their Gardens: A History of School Gardens in America, 1891 to 1920,” Landscape Journal 16, no. 2 (October 1, 1997): 331. Figure 3: Symbolic diagram created by John Dewey. (John Dewey, 1899.) 32 Francis Wayland Parker, a dynamic teacher and astute administrator who led the Cook County Normal School in Chicago, was also a former rural schoolteacher. Between 1872 and 1875, he embarked on a European journey inspired by Edwin Sheldon’s work Lessons on Objects. He encountered cutting-edge teaching methods during his travels, primarily in Germany and Switzerland. Upon returning to America, he became convinced that children’s social and intellectual development depended on active learning with objects.85 Parker declared that elementary science is best for integrating language, math, and art education. To implement this vision, he enlisted the expertise of naturalist Henry Straight, renowned for introducing living things into his innovative courses at the esteemed Oswego Normal School in Upstate New York.86 Straight’s pedagogical approach, “object teaching,” revolutionized American education. Inspired by the principles of Swiss educator Johann Pestalozzi, object teaching emphasized the use of physical objects rather than textbooks to convey educational concepts. Its foundational premise was that children learn more effectively through direct sensory experience rather than rote memorization and recitation. 87 For instance, Straight encouraged students to understand each object's close ties to the surrounding woods, marshes, and lakefront.88 With the leadership of Straight, Oswego Normal School emerged as the primary institution associated with object teaching in America, and this innovative approach quickly gained traction in schools nationwide. By 1870, object lessons had evolved into a method for teaching natural science to elementary school children.89 Straight only worked in Chicago for three years and died at the age of 85 Sally Gregory Kohlstedt, “Nature, Not Books: Scientists and the Origins of the Nature‐Study Movement in the 1890s,” Isis 96, no. 3 (2005): 331, https://doi.org/10.1086/447745. 86 Kohlstedt, 332. 87 Armitage, The Nature Study Movement, 22. 88 Kohlstedt, “Nature, Not Books,” 332. 89 Armitage, The Nature Study Movement, 23. 33 forty. After Straight died, Parker recruited Wilbur S. Jackman, an experienced educator dedicated to experiential learning principles.90 Cook County Normal School was a pivotal platform for Wilbur S. Jackman to promote his “nature study” program, which gained widespread attention. As the school’s reputation grew, it became another laboratory school at the University of Chicago. Jackman capitalized on his growing influence by speaking at regional and national meetings for teachers, advocating integrating” nature study” into educational curricula. Wilbur S. Jackman was considered one of the originators of the nature study movement in America. While he did not invent the term “nature study,” Jackman revitalized it through his vigorous advocacy of the field and the teacher preparation program he established to encourage its adoption.91 Jackman suggested that educators base their teaching strategies on the “spontaneous development of the child’s mind under the influence of the natural environment”. Under such process, a child’s cognitive and emotional growth occurs naturally through the interactions with their natural surroundings. Such development is not instilled by formal education in traditional teaching settings. It refers to learning through exploration and sensory experiences in nature. He also highlighted the value of children’s observations by giving them questions to research.92 To help other educators implement “nature study” in their schools, Jackman published two books. The first is Nature Study for the Common Schools in 1891, and the second is Nature Study for Grammar Grades, A Manual for Teachers and Pupils below the High School in the Study of Nature in 1899. He reconciled the contrast between theoretical knowledge and practical experience by devising a clever sequence of problems and associated questions, deliberately omitting answers. 90 Kohlstedt, “Nature, Not Books,” 332. 91 Kohlstedt, 333. 92 Kohlstedt, 334. 34 This approach compelled students and educators to learn through hands-on experience and experimentation.93 Jackman’s book introduced the concept of the “rolling year” curriculum, which structured assignments and projects according to the seasons. For example, students embarked on field trips during spring to explore the local flora and natural phenomena. In contrast, winter months were dedicated to indoor activities such as observation and experiments.94 Jackman also encouraged students to investigate the condition of plants during winter, prompting them to identify instances where stems had been killed while roots remained alive.95 Here is the proposed work and questions for children to explore botany in December, as presented in Jackman’s work:96 1. Sometime during a hard freeze examine the smaller twigs. Are they frozen through? How protected? 2. Open the buds; are they frozen? What are the ways by which the buds are protected? 3. Are they wet through when it rains? 4. Can you still distinguish the newly formed wood? 5. Is any part of the twig still green? 6. Look for seeds of weeds and other plants that have been scattered about; do they freeze? Can you find any that are sprouting? 7. Can you tell whether or not it kills them? 8. Are those that are buried in a few inches of earth frozen? 9. Look for acorns and other nuts; how does the freezing affect them? 93 Schmitt, Back to Nature, 81. 94 Kohlstedt, “‘A Better Crop of Boys and Girls,’” 59–60. 95 Wilbur S. (Wilbur Samuel) Jackman, Nature Study for the Common Schools (New York: H. Holt and Company, 1894), 146, http://archive.org/details/naturestudyforco00jackrich. 96 Jackman, 146. 35 10. Can you find any plants whose stems have been killed, but whose roots are still living? 11. Do the roots of the trees freeze? 12. Can you find any injurious effects of frost and freezing on the trunks of trees? 13. Can you find any growing plants? In 1891, Jackman offered his principle of nature study to the National Education Association, adapting nature study to the nature of the child, focusing on general characteristics and the relationship between things, following the natural cycle of the year in nature study, base nature-study on observation, and use nature-study as a basis for expression.”97 Jackman was influenced by Hall’s research and advocated for implementing school gardens in urban areas. School gardens were able to provide children with exposure to nature, addressing deficiencies highlighted by Hall regarding urban children’s understanding and natural phenomena. Additionally, school gardens aimed to enhance the otherwise bleak urban environment by introducing elements of nature into the daily lives of city-dwelling children. Jackman’s consistent writings on nature study during the 1890s, active participation in professional meetings, and publication of numerous articles on the subject elevated him into the educational mainstream.98 In December 1892, a select group of national educators convened to discuss the most effective way to teach natural history in the classroom. According to the conference committee report, it was recommended that natural history should be introduced as early as possible in the curriculum. The committee proposed dedicating at least an hour every week, split into two sessions, throughout the academic year to the subject. Their published explanatory notes emphasized prioritizing direct interaction with nature over reliance on textbooks.99 97 Kohlstedt, “Nature, Not Books,” 334. 98 Kohlstedt, 335. 99 Kohlstedt, 336. 36 Jackman's curriculum directly impacted aspiring educators in the Cook County Normal model school.100 In 1905, the U.S. Commissioner of Education submitted a report claiming Chicago had included nature study as the foundation for all their instructional activities. They mentioned the summer vacation schools as an example, which catered mostly to impoverished children whose parents were at work and so could not care for them.101 The Links to the Rise of School Gardens In the United States, the integration of house gardens, initially conceptualized by Friedrich Fröbel, and the educational methodology of object teaching pioneered by Johann Pestalozzi evolved through the efforts of various American education reformers. This evolution led to various school gardens and marked a significant development in American pedagogical approaches. Educators began to recognize the profound impact of hands-on learning experiences in fostering comprehensive development and facilitating a deep understanding of natural sciences and agricultural practices. School gardens emerged as an accessible and affordable addition to school facilities, providing children with opportunities to engage with the natural world. These gardens, integrated into the school environment, allowed children to work independently under the guidance of educators and see the science of biology for themselves. School gardens served as school resources and benefited the wider community and neighborhood.102 The importance and necessity of nature study for rural residents were as crucial as for urban children to be exposed to nature. Mere physical proximity to nature did not guarantee that farmers 100 Kohlstedt, 337. 101 Kohlstedt, 340. 102 Kohlstedt, “‘A Better Crop of Boys and Girls,’” 60. 37 would inherently understand how to utilize it wisely or remain unaffected by industrial influences. The impact of industrialism extended beyond urban areas to revolutionize the entire nation, including rural regions. Thus, farm children required nature study as much as their urban counterparts did to cultivate an appreciation for and understanding of the natural world amidst the changing landscape shaped by industrial advancements.103 In the late nineteenth century, widespread agitation for popular education emerged to address various social and economic challenges, such as city congestion, excessive cost of living, and health issues like tuberculosis. Legislators responded by passing laws requiring the teaching of elementary agriculture, which reflects a growing recognition of the importance of practical skills and knowledge related to agriculture and nature. Conclusion Supporters of the Country Life Movement believed that farmers embodied the best qualities of society, including hard work and perseverance. They hoped that these virtues and the values of rural life could endure in an increasingly urbanized and industrialized world. It is important to note that the Country Life Movement was not advocating for a return to a purely agricultural society but rather seeking to preserve agrarian life's social and political virtues within the changing world. Education was seen as a powerful tool for these supporters and reformers. Through education, they aimed to instill the joys of rural living in children and teach virtues through farming and gardening. For instance, according to Friedrich Fröbel, children could understand the reciprocal interaction between the individual and the collective while engaging in gardening activities. Many educators 103 Armitage, The Nature Study Movement, 170. 38 traveled abroad to learn diverse educational theories in Europe, which is why Fröbel significantly impacted the United States. Here in America, John Dewey provided another foundation for future nature study and school gardening, promoting the integration of schools with society through progressive education. Henry Straight’s “object teaching” advocated experiential learning, and Wilbur S. Jackman introduced the concept of "nature study" into the educational landscape. The Country Life Movement recognized the importance of children’s education, and the Nature- Study Movement encouraged educators to introduce natural elements to children beyond traditional teaching methods. The Country Life Movement sought to convey the beauty of country living through education, while the Nature-Study Movement aimed to connect children with the natural world and introduce natural history in ways beyond textbooks. These two movements were well interconnected. Developing school farms or school gardens became a means to achieve these goals. By the 1910s, rural and urban gardening initiatives garnered significant support from national gardening and agricultural organizations.104 Federal administrators within the Bureau of Education and the Department of Agriculture supported nature study and interest in the school garden movement. While school gardens relied on local resources, both federal agencies sought to claim some authority over their initiatives and exercise oversight. Both agencies aimed to establish themselves as leaders in the expanding national gardening movement, leveraging their federal status and public franking privileges to publish and distribute literature to a nationwide audience.105 104 Kohlstedt, “‘A Better Crop of Boys and Girls,’” 60. 105 Kohlstedt, 84. 39 CHAPTER THREE - SCHOOL GARDENS IN URBAN AND RURAL SETTINGS Introduction Establishing school gardens in urban and rural contexts depended on how ideas introduced in one location inspired parents, teachers, and students in another. Federal, state, and local government agencies played a role, as did private non-profit organizations that published and promoted programs duplicated repeatedly across the country. This chapter begins with a look at the situation in New York City, a leader in educational reform. The discussion continues by examining the school gardens in its suburbs. It then describes the contributions of leading Cornell University educators in the state's rural areas and elsewhere. The School Garden in New York City Various social and educational factors, including child labor laws, compulsory education laws, and the deplorable conditions of city schools, influenced the establishment of school gardens in urban settings like New York City. The enactment of child labor laws and compulsory attendance statutes aimed to shift children from the workforce into educational institutions.106 However, the limited educational resources in cities like New York could not accommodate the influx of students, resulting in overcrowded and unsanitary school conditions. One reporter uncovered a school in New York where 768 children attended classes “over the offensive live-chicken market in Essex Street” and in “dark, unfurnished 106 William A. Bullough, Cities and Schools in the Gilded Age: The Evolution of an Urban Institution (Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1974), 165, http://archive.org/details/citiesschoolsing0000bull. 40 rooms in Allen Street where pupils study on their knees.” Children studied in environments surrounded by undesirable facilities, such as sausage factories and tenements, with little equipment and safety hazards.107 Even though the government prompted some action for the deplorable conditions in New York City schools, the program scale makes it impossible to achieve a comprehensive solution. Between 1895 and 1902, the New York City Public Education Association spent more than $12 million to construct 69 new school buildings. Despite efforts to improve school infrastructure, many children, especially those from impoverished backgrounds, continued to study under adverse circumstances.108 These schools' curriculum and teaching methods often focused on rote memorization and recitation, lacking relevance to students’ lives and interests. In a New York City school, the principal’s educational philosophy, as he acknowledged, revolved around the principle of “Save the Minutes.” This approach led to the adopting of rote memorization and recitation as teaching methods. Furthermore, even the physical movements during recitation were coordinated with military precision to save additional time. Similar conditions were observed in city after city. Imagined an oversized Polish or Lithuanian boy had to be confined to a desk too small for him in a crowded room filled with noticeably younger children, subjected to their taunts and the teacher’s evident disdain for his learning capabilities. These children hardly found school appealing compared to the factory, which at least provided minimal wages.109 As a result, many children expressed a preference for factory work over attending school, where they felt marginalized and disconnected from the learning process.110 In this context, nature study and school gardens offered a respite for city-dwelling children to engage with the natural world and 107 Bullough, 24. 108 Bullough, 24. 109 Bullough, 20–21. 110 Bullough, 21. 41 escape the oppressive conditions of urban schools and factories. Integrating nature study into public school curricula and establishing school gardens provided hands-on learning and exploration opportunities, appealing to children’s curiosity and offering a meaningful alternative to traditional classroom instruction. School gardens served as a valuable educational resource for urban students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, by offering a space for children to connect with nature and learn about the environment. These initiatives sought a holistic education that nurtured students’ physical, emotional, and intellectual development, offering a refreshing contrast to the urban landscape dominated by concrete. In urban settings like the Children’s School Farm at DeWitt Clinton Park, school gardens were often established in vacant lots near immigrant communities, serving multiple objectives. Beyond improving the urban environment by introducing green spaces into densely populated immigrant neighborhoods like Hell’s Kitchen (Figure 3), these gardens and associated organizations also aimed to emphasize the importance of manual labor among immigrant children. Additionally, they played a crucial role in cultural integration efforts, seeking to assimilate “the children of our alien population” into American society by exposing them to agricultural practices and values associated with the nationwide pursuit of rural living.111 111 Trelstad, “Little Machines in Their Gardens,” 166. 42 Despite the widespread interest in school gardening, the School Board of New York City did not formally recognize school gardens as part of its educational system. A few school gardens were associated with vacation schools, but they were not officially integrated into the broader school curriculum.112 The Children’s School Farm in DeWitt Clinton Park and the Fairview Garden School were notable examples. 112 M. Louise Greene, Among School Gardens (New York: Charities publication committee, 1910), 237, https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.118055. Figure 4: Typical gang of street urchins at Hell’s Kitchen. (The New York Public Library Digital Collections.) 43 The Children's School Farm in DeWitt Clinton Park, Manhattan, New York Frances Griscom Parsons established the First Children’s School Farm in New York City in 1902 on a vacant lot in the Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood on West 53rd Street.113 Parsons believed in the importance of education in developing character traits and imparting essential knowledge to each new generation of children. To achieve this, she proposed three interconnected elements: the Home within the house, activities related to farming or gardening, and Household Industries and Shop Work. These components, collectively called The Children’s School Farm, formed the foundation of Parsons’ educational philosophy. In addition to implementing this approach at the Children’s School Farm she founded, Parsons sought to disseminate the principles of school gardening and seamlessly integrate these elements into the school curriculum. She aimed to ensure their universal applicability across distinct types of schools and locations, including large urban schools with limited land resources.114 By 1905, the Children’s School Farm had engaged 5,000 children in a season’s work, with an additional 2,200 public school children participating in nature study activities at the site.115 The initiative expanded to include all types of schools, including public, parochial, and industrial schools. The School Farm served as a valuable nature study laboratory, with groups of children visiting the farm for hands-on learning experiences during September and October.116 For instance, the Children’s School Farm opened to DeWitt Clinton High School students for their biology and botany classes. Six hundred boys from the DeWitt Clinton High School, attending 113 Greene, 237. 114 Mrs. Henry Parsons, “The Children’s Farms of New York,” The Journal of Education 84, no. 4 (2090) (1916): 104–104. 115 Parsons. 116 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1912 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 1912, 27. 44 classes ranging from 45 to 200 students, used the garden three times a week. The farm answered their botanical questions firsthand among the vibrant greenery.117 The participants in the Children’s School Farm in 1912 included students from 13 public schools, four parochial schools, one high school, two industrial schools, three industrial schools, and disabled children brought by Crippled Children’s Driving Fund.118 The observation plots at the Children’s School Farm were particularly noteworthy. They held value not only for the older children but also for adults in the neighborhood. For example, a four-by- eight-foot observation plot served as a bridge between the garden and the Irish community in the neighborhood. The plants in this plot evoked memories of Ireland for many Irish immigrants in Hell’s Kitchen. Another observation plot, known as the “Shakespeare Plot,” contained flowers whose seeds reportedly originated from William Shakespeare’s home in Stratford-on-Avon.119 The Children’s School Farm gained international recognition, attracting visitors from locations such as Cairo, Egypt, and various cities in Canada, including Ontario, Belleville, and Toronto.120 The initiative was awarded a gold medal and honorable mention at the International Tuberculosis Congress in Washington, D.C., for its impactful contributions to education and community well- being: “A beautiful work, wisely planned, successfully demonstrated and prolific in its results.”121 She also advocated implementing the school farm initiatives beyond schools, in hospitals.122 117 Henry Griscom Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education (New York: Sturgis & Walton Company, 1912), 209, http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924000682603. 118 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1912 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 35. 119 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education, 206–7. 120 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1912 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 36. 121 “Children’s School Farm ‘A Beautiful Work,’” The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, January 18, 1909, 10. 122 Parsons, “The Children’s Farms of New York.” 45 Unfortunately, the Children’s School Farm in DeWitt Clinton Park ended in 1932 due to the construction of the West Side Highway, which encroached upon the park’s boundaries, leading to the site's closure. The collaboration of the Parks Department and individuals like Frances Parsons led to the establishment of many school farms in the city. These school farms offered a rich learning environment where children could study various aspects of biology, botany, and ecology. Students learned about insects and their habitats, dangers associated with pests like flies and mosquitoes, and effective control methods. Additionally, they had the opportunity to explore economic plants such as cotton, peanuts, and wheat, gaining insights into the agricultural industry and the production of essential goods.123 The educational value of school farms extended beyond young children, as demonstrated by the experience of the graduating class of girls from Washington Irving High School. These young adults found that they could acquire more knowledge of biology and botany from working on a small plot in the open area than from years of studying charts and graphs in enclosed classrooms.124 This highlights the effectiveness of experiential learning and the transformative impact of hands-on engagement with nature on students’ understanding and appreciation of scientific concepts. 123 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1931 Manhattan Borough Parks Department Annual Report,” 1931. 124 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education, 209–10. 46 Figure 6: Children took a break from their work in Children’s School Farm in 1902. (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, 1902.) Figure 5: Planting Map of Children’s School Farm, 1905. (New York City Municipal Archives, Department of Parks Drawings Collection, 1905.) 47 Figure 7: Children’s School Farm in 1908. (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, 1908.) 48 The Fairview Garden School Association, Yonkers, New York While a successful school farm ran in the heart of New York City, a unique garden school was established in a nearby city. The Fairview Garden School, located in Yonkers was a unique establishment separate from the traditional school system. Fairview Garden School operated independently unlike school gardens integrated into existing school facilities. It functioned as a school garden, although it wasn’t explicitly referred to as such.125 The Chairman of the Fairview Garden School, A.L. Livermore, claimed that the garden school is an excellent educational and social resource for a child’s physical, mental, and moral development.126 The Fairview Garden School opened to the public in the summer of 1903, transforming a vacant lot in the tenement district into two small gardens. Thirty-six boys from public and parochial schools participated in this initial endeavor.127 However, the school’s scope expanded significantly thanks to a generous donation, which allowed the acquisition of five acres of land on Fairview Street. This land was divided into 250 plots, each measuring approximately ten by sixteen feet.128 125 N. Y. Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Henrietta Jackson Wells "Mrs. A. L. Livermore" Livermore, School Gardens: Report of the Fairview Garden Association, Yonkers, N.Y. ([New York City: Dept. of child hygiene, Russell Sage Foundation], 1910), 12, http://archive.org/details/schoolgardensrep00fair. 126 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, 14. 127 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, 13. 128 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, 14. 49 Figure 8: Sanborn Map 1917 showing the location of Fairview Garden School. (Library of Congress, 1917.) 50 The Fairview Garden Association was granted temporary site usage, and the adjacent piece was purchased. Additionally, structures and enhancements were provided. With these resources, the school could admit six hundred boys and girls aged eight to thirteen. Each student was allocated a plot measuring ten by sixteen feet, allowing them to participate in gardening activities actively.129 A profound link exists between home gardens and school gardens. Cleveland was considered the location of the home gardening movement, while school gardens also prevailed with the leading of Louise Klein Miller. Cleveland’s Home Gardening Association, which operated through schools, significantly contributed to the aesthetics of individual houses and the city.130 The association offered seeds and gardening information to children for home gardens by distributing seed packets. By 1905, their nationwide seed packet initiative had expanded to provide 238,000 seed packets in Cleveland and 151,000 elsewhere.131 The Fairview Garden School in Yonkers adopted the successful model of Cleveland’s home gardening movement to initiate home gardening efforts in their community. They distributed order cards containing lists of flower and vegetable seeds to schools, encouraging children and their parents to purchase seeds for home planting. These seeds were offered at an affordable price, with packets priced at just one penny each. The variety of seeds available was extensive, including sixteen varieties of flower seeds, eight varieties of vegetable seeds, gladiolus bulbs, and grass seeds.132 To facilitate the distribution process, the Garden School purchased seeds in massive quantities, enabling them to offer a diverse selection to the community. The children of the Garden School 129 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, 14. 130 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, 10. 131 Louise A. Mozingo and Linda Jewell, Women in Landscape Architecture: Essays on History and Practice (McFarland, 2011), 56. 132 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, School Gardens, 10. 51 undertook the task of distributing seeds,133 actively involving them in promoting home gardening in Yonkers. According to the Fairview Garden School Association report, in 1909, 33,000 penny packets of seeds were ordered by 3300 children of Yonkers for home gardens. In the census report for New York State in 1910, Yonkers had a population of children from five to fourteen years old, numbering 15,029. Approximately 22% of the children in Yonkers engaged in the gardening practice at school or home with their families in 1909. 133 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, 10. Figure 9: Some school children with plants raised in the classroom for decorating soldiers’ graves on Memorial Day. Fairview Garden School, Yonkers, N.Y., 1903. (New York State Archives. New York (State). Education Dept. Division of Visual Instruction, 1903.) 52 The International Children's School Farm League Frances Griscom Parsons and her son Henry Parsons were instrumental in organizing the International Children’s School Farm League following the success of the Children’s School Farm in New York City. This league helped establish multiple gardens for children in various parts of the city beyond Manhattan in 1908. The organization showcased its work at several exhibitions, including the Congestion Exhibition at the American Museum of Natural History and the Mothers Exposition in Manhattan.134 134 “Children’s School Farm ‘A Beautiful Work.’” Figure 10: Children’s School Farm exhibited by the New York City International Children’s School Farm League. (Collections of the Museum of the City of New York, ca. 1870- 1910.) 53 In 1909, the organization sought to raise an annual sum of $10,000 for various proposed activities. These included generating widespread interest in children’s gardens and assisting in initiating gardens connected to schools until education boards recognized their value and assumed responsibility for their upkeep. Additionally, the organization aimed to advocate for establishing children’s gardens in suitable parks within neighborhoods with significant child populations. They also planned to create special gardens for children with mental or physical disabilities, advocate for the employment of trained teachers for children’s garden work, and establish training courses for such teachers. Moreover, they intended to address numerous requests for exhibits of models of children’s school farms and maintain a bureau to provide information and advice on starting and managing gardens, offer lectures and printed materials, and supply and exchange photographs and lantern slides.135 In the 1910s, the universal and remarkable rise in the price of food staples and the consequent increased cost of living brought the question of growing vegetables in urban areas more forcibly. This led to a better appreciation of the practical aspect of farm garden work following the leadership of Frances Parsons. The Department of Parks of the City of New York tried to encourage the creation of farm gardens throughout the city, utilizing vacant spaces, front yards, and back yards, of which there is a considerable number even in a city as congested as New York. As head of the Bureau of Farm Gardens of the Department of Parks of the City of New York, Frances Parsons addressed many organizations on the school gardens and farm gardens and stimulated interest in developing this movement. The league's effort was the school farm established in Thomas Jefferson Park in New York City. Henry Parsons announced in a meeting in 1911 that the two acres of Thomas Jefferson Park would contain 1,400 miniature farms with little roadways built between. He also showed pictures of people 135 “Children’s School Farm ‘A Beautiful Work.’” 54 who are blind, disabled, and poor at work among the plants to the audience in the meeting to present the effort that the league was making.136 The School Garden Association of New York In the early twentieth century, school gardens gained increasing traction in New York City schools. This momentum led to the formation of a School Garden Association. In the spring of 1908, there was a call for establishing a permanent organization dedicated to school gardening. On March 30, 1908, the School Garden Association of New York was officially founded at the American Museum of Natural History. The Association expanded rapidly with the widespread interest in the school gardens in New York City. By the first annual meeting on February 26 and 27, 1909, the paid membership had exceeded 700 members.137 The School Garden Association of New York’s efforts had focused on enrolling members, establishing a robust organizational structure, examining the conditions of school garden initiatives in New York, organizing public meetings, advocating for funding in the City budget through a hearing with the Committee on Elementary Schools of the Board of Education, and overseeing a boys’ garden project in Van Cortlandt Park.138 School gardening was regarded as the most intimate approach to improving school grounds. There were multiple types of school gardens found in New York, including: 136 “SAYS SCHOOL FARMS KEEP CHILDREN WELL; President Brannan of Bellevue Commends the Work at a Colony Club Meeting.,” The New York Times, March 30, 1911, sec. Archives, https://www.nytimes.com/1911/03/30/archives/says-school-farms-keep-children-well-president-brannan-of- bellevue.html. 137 School Garden Association of New York, “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York,” March 1909, 7–8. 138 School Garden Association of New York, 8. 55 1. Outdoor gardens on school premises. These gardens allow for individual cultivation of small plots by each pupil in a group or class. While relatively few exist, there is potential for many more to be established. 2. Outdoor garden beds serve as observational plots. These are valuable and could be implemented in all schools, particularly in densely populated areas. 3. Home gardens and potted plants cultivated at home. This approach can be adopted in all outlying districts and, to some extent, all schools. Encouraging school children to raise potted plants at home can be enhanced through annual plant exhibits in each school. 4. Indoor conservatories, window boxes, and potted plants. Nearly all schools had some form of indoor vegetation. 5. Vacation school gardens. The city had approximately fifteen such gardens, some highly successful.139 According to the 1909 annual report of the School Garden Association of New York, there were a total of 86 school gardens distributed across the five boroughs of New York City. Queens had the highest number with 36 gardens, followed by Manhattan with 19, Brooklyn with 14, Richmond with 13, and the Bronx with 4.140 Of these 86 gardens, 60 submitted reports to the School Garden Association, sharing their achievements and challenges. One key issue highlighted in the reports was the interference of shade from tall buildings, which posed a significant challenge for some gardens. The report suggested the only solution was identifying plants that could thrive with limited sunlight. For instance, Public 139 School Garden Association of New York, 9. 140 School Garden Association of New York, 18. 56 School 41 in Manhattan faced this issue, and the organization offered assistance based on its expertise.141 The School Garden Association proposed various locations for establishing school gardens, including borders and beds around schoolyards, vacant lots in the neighborhood, designated gardening areas in public parks, and even the roofs of schools lacking space. Indoor gardening using window boxes and pots was also recommended as a last resort.142 Schools were encouraged to tailor their garden plans to their budgets and resources. Public School 52 in Manhattan boasted the largest garden in the city in 1909 (Figure.10 and Figure.11), which had been opened in 1905. Additionally, home gardens were considered a viable solution for schools with limited budgets or insufficient available land. For example, Public School 8 in Richmond implemented home gardens, where each represented family cultivated their garden plots, fostering a spirit of cooperation among students and teachers.143 141 School Garden Association of New York, 18–19. 142 School Garden Association of New York, 29. 143 School Garden Association of New York, 23. Figure 11: Public School 52 in Manhattan. (MyInwood.net.) 57 Agricultural Education in the Rural Setting Nature study was initially established in Chicago, where its program served as a model for implementation in other major cities. Supported by academic experts and administrative supervisors, nature-study programs were integrated into the school system. Beyond metropolitan areas, educators in upstate New York also took note of the successes achieved in Chicago’s school system. They subsequently developed their nature-study curriculum tailored specifically for children residing in rural areas.144 As a metropolitan area, Chicago had limited access to natural resources for educational activities. In contrast, with its rural landscape, upstate New York boasted abundant natural resources. 144 Kohlstedt, “Nature, Not Books,” 340. Figure 12: School Garden of Public School 52 in Manhattan. (MyInwood.net.) 58 Recognizing this, Cornell University’s College of Agriculture established a nature-study department and developed rural programs that leveraged the resources available to students in small towns and rural areas. These programs aimed to give students a new perspective on the familiar farms and wildlife abundant in their immediate surroundings.145 Furthermore, school systems in rural areas differed significantly from major cities like Chicago. The reforms in rural school systems coincided with the introduction of nature study into rural education around the same period. In rural areas, many one-room schools prevailed, prompting criticism from reformers who deemed them ineffective and wasteful. In 1915, there were 8,000 one-room schools in New York State alone; of these, nearly half had an average attendance of ten students or less. Remarkably, these included 172 schools with three students, 74 with two, and 13 with only one.146 School consolidation emerged as a solution to distribute educational resources more in rural areas. However, concerns among rural Americans persisted, particularly regarding the potential loss of rural tradition post-consolidation.147 While one-room schools held nostalgic memories for many rural Americans, their shortcomings were evident. One-room schools were unhygienic; students could get tuberculosis from the contaminated air, had spine problems from the backless benches, and could lose their vision from working in the dim light. Reformers also argued that one-room schools were even less effective in teaching, as American rural teachers favored rote learning over modern pedagogical methods.148 To assuage concerns about school consolidation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture produced a film depicting the varied educational opportunities available in consolidated schools. Boys were 145 Kohlstedt, 340. 146 Jonathan Zimmerman, Small Wonder (Yale University Press, 2009), 30, http://www.jstor.org.proxy.library.cornell.edu/stable/j.ctt1npmc4. 147 Zimmerman, 80. 148 Zimmerman, 81. 59 shown studying new agricultural and animal husbandry methods, while girls learned sewing and cooking. The underlying message was clear: consolidated schools aimed to preserve and enhance rural customs rather than erase them. A well-known reformer claimed that the new schools promised nothing less than “the complete regeneration of rural life.” 149 Consolidated schools reportedly improved the physical condition of school facilities in rural areas. Many reformers agreed that the primary solution to the rural school’s ineffectiveness was reorienting it to prepare young individuals for rural living better. It is important to acknowledge that children in rural areas typically possess familiarity with fundamental gardening tasks, including soil preparation, seed planting, and tending to crops and produce. Therefore, establishing conventional individual vegetable or flower gardens within rural school premises may not be the most prudent use of time and resources.150 School gardens often comprised miniature vegetable or flower plots in urban settings. However, in rural communities where families typically own land, students may benefit more from experimenting with various grains or grasses on home plots. This allows small-scale experiments to enhance observational skills and explore different tillage methods and agricultural principles, emphasizing the relevance of such practices in their future endeavors.151 In addition to exploring natural areas, rural schools were encouraged to arrange groups of shrubs and trees on school grounds in aesthetically pleasing patterns. This can create an attractive landscape while providing material for instructional purposes. Understanding the habits and uses of different plants can help rural students appreciate the value of decorative plantings in their homes. This approach does not require considerable time or energy, acknowledging that some children may already be 149 Zimmerman, 82. 150 L. C. (Lee Cleveland) Corbett, The School Garden (Washington: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1922), 3, http://archive.org/details/CAT31126367. 151 Corbett, 3. 60 engaged in farm work. However, it offers a broader and less demanding educational experience, potentially more beneficial in rural communities than focusing solely on individual garden maintenance.152 While school gardens might not have been a traditional feature of rural schools, the concept remains relevant to agricultural education in rural communities. Emphasizing a “learning by doing” philosophy, rural students could engage in learning activities within their family farms, home gardens, and nearby natural areas, such as creeks and ponds, which were easily accessible. The approach most frequently proposed to improve rural education strongly emphasized connecting the school with its surrounding environment, known as nature study. Moreover, a nature- centered approach was intended to permeate all coursework, thereby fostering an idealization of country life. Furthermore, textbooks utilized by rural children should be revised to reflect this agricultural and nature-oriented perspective.153 Regarding the development of nature study programs in upstate New York, the contributions of Liberty Hyde Bailey and Anna Comstock are noteworthy. Cornell’s Educators Liberty Hyde Bailey, director of the College of Agriculture at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, played a pivotal role in the country life and nature study movements, advocating for agricultural education in rural areas. Under his leadership in the late 1890s and early 1900s, the Nature Study Department at Cornell University collaborated with rural schools to develop school gardens and produce educational materials for teachers and students. Bailey emphasized that nature study differed from specific sciences like botany or entomology, focusing instead on observing and 152 Corbett, 3–4. 153 Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920, 80. 61 understanding natural phenomena without strict classification or specialization. The primary goal of nature study was to cultivate an appreciation and interest in the natural world among students, enriching their lives.154 Bailey viewed the Cornell nature-study movement as part of a broader educational awakening to foster direct interaction and empathy between children and their environment. He highlighted the importance of agricultural education and the promotion of rural living, noting that the absence of school gardens hindered agricultural education in American rural schools compared to those in Europe. Bailey suggested that if school gardens were not feasible, students could study various aspects of their surroundings, such as the school premises or local agricultural industries.155 He believed that agricultural education should be integrated into primary and secondary school curricula, emphasizing its relevance to students’ lives and experiences. Bailey argued that agricultural colleges aimed not to train farmers but to educate them, broadening their perspectives beyond technical farming to encompass all aspects of rural life and community development.156 In Bailey’s philosophy, farmers were not merely producers of commodities but active citizens contributing to the welfare of society. He emphasized the importance of addressing various aspects of rural life, including infrastructure, education, and community organization. According to Bailey, nature study and agricultural education should not limit students to farming. They should give them a deeper understanding of rural living and empower them to improve their communities through technical knowledge and civic engagement.157 154 Cornell University College of Agriculture., Cornell Nature-Study Leaflets (Albany: J. B. Lyon Co., Printers, 1904), http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001666852. 155 Cornell University College of Agriculture. 156 Cornell University College of Agriculture. 157 Cornell University College of Agriculture. 62 Anna Comstock, a former schoolteacher from Cornell University, was pivotal in promoting nature study. She married John Henry Comstock, who was dedicated to extension work with farmers. Anna often accompanied her husband on lecture tours in the countryside during the late 1880s. Leveraging her experience as a schoolteacher, she frequently highlighted the beneficial relationship between education and rural living during conferences and discussions. The New York State legislature established a Committee for the Promotion of Agriculture to handle the “abandoned farm” problem, which arose from farming families leaving to seek employment in already congested cities as the nation’s Depression of the 1890s worsened into the panic of 1893. The committee’s appointed member, Anna Comstock, proposed that nature study gave young people a valuable perspective on country living. “Nature study” was expressly named when the legislature added monies for Cornell University’s farm extension program in 1894. By 1896, the state was allocating $8,000 annually for these projects. 158 Incorporating nature study into rural education was viewed as a remedy to stem the tide of rural depopulation. By equipping children with an understanding of and reverence for the natural environment, educators hoped to cultivate a generation of individuals committed to continuing rural life. Nature study emerged as a powerful tool for educational reformation and the preservation of agrarian communities. Anna Comstock’s approach was a practical variation on the child-centered concept of the progressive educators at the University of Chicago. It began with the goal of making use of students’ natural curiosity. Comstock clarified that nature study should strongly emphasize visual and other sensory experiences.159 Many teachers were willing and interested in using nature study, but they required guidance and direction. Comstock created a correspondence program called Home Nature-Study Course. A set of 158 Kohlstedt, “Nature, Not Books,” 341. 159 Kohlstedt, 342. 63 pamphlets educated individuals by assigning tasks to be completed through direct observation of nature, designed for dispersed teachers with no experience. Conclusion As mentioned in the previous chapter, the gradual development in the educational field and the emergence of nature study led to the rise in popularity of school gardening. The pioneering Children's School Farm at DeWitt Clinton Park served as a prime example and model for many subsequent school farms and school gardens, both in the United States and around the world. The founder of the Children's School Farm also established the International Children’s School Farm League to promote school gardening initiatives internationally. Following in the footsteps of the Children's School Farm, the Fairview Garden School emerged as another exemplary instance of school gardening in an urban setting. With the growing interest in school gardening in New York City, the School Garden Association of New York was created to support the development of school gardens in public schools. By 1909, there were 86 school gardens in New York City, demonstrating the widespread popularity of school gardening practices. Nature studies also spread into rural areas. Notably, the College of Agriculture at Cornell University established a nature-study department and developed rural programs that leveraged resources available to students in small towns and rural areas. Liberty Hyde Bailey and Anna Comstock were two key figures in the Nature Study Movement in rural settings. Compared to the school gardening initiatives in urban areas, nature study in rural areas was more aligned with agricultural education, reflecting the goals of the Country Life Movement. Students were encouraged 64 to conduct farming and gardening experiments on their land under the supervision of teachers, allowing them to observe and experience the surrounding natural environment. Establishing school farms and gardens beautified these neighborhoods and provided a valuable opportunity for children to connect with nature. For many of these children, it may be their first experience growing something independently. Unlike their middle-class counterparts who may have access to suburban homes with backyards and opportunities to garden with their parents, school gardening offers a novel and enriching experience for children from low-income families. In contrast to urban settings, where school gardens were crucial in connecting children with nature, rural areas offered direct access to natural resources for children raised in agricultural environments. Many rural children grew up on family farms, where they were accustomed to working the land from an early age. Additionally, the rural landscape often provided many opportunities for exploration, with nearby creeks, forests, and other natural features readily accessible during leisure time. Despite this proximity to nature, the educational materials in rural schools often failed to reflect the realities of their daily lives. The advocacy for integrating nature study in rural education sought to bridge this gap by encouraging children to learn from their surroundings and appreciate their natural resources. Unlike the urban focus on introducing nature to city-dwelling children through school gardens, the emphasis in rural areas was on connecting daily rural life to education. However, this approach was not solely aimed at training children to become farmers; rather, it aimed to broaden their perspectives by leveraging their existing intimate connection with nature. Through school farms and gardens in urban settings and agricultural education in rural areas, these initiatives aimed to foster interaction and empathy between children and the natural world. This approach helped convey the virtues of the old agricultural society to children and promoted the beauty of country living, which will be discussed further in the next chapter. 65 CHAPTER FOUR - GARDENS FOR HEALTH AND PROMOTING CIVIC VALUES Introduction For children and their families, the motivations to join school gardening programs often extended beyond educational benefits. A child’s ability to produce vegetables worth five dollars on a small plot could represent a tangible contribution to the family’s food supply, providing economic relief. As compulsory education became the norm, children from economically disadvantaged families faced increased concerns about health and safety. The rise in the number of disabled children in the early twentieth century led to the development of specialized programs for young people with special needs. As previously mentioned, the enactment of child labor laws shifted children from the workforce into educational institutions. These institutions aimed to engage and retain students in school through innovative methods, such as involving them in school gardening and connecting them with nature. The increasing number of immigrant children in New York City also brought more students into schools. School gardening initiatives sought to improve the urban environment in densely populated, impoverished immigrant neighborhoods. These programs also aimed to instill civic values in immigrant children, helping them assimilate and become “American.” This chapter will explore how school gardening initiatives promoted health and civic values. Gardens to Promote Health For children with delicate health conditions, finding suitable activities that promote both physical and emotional well-being can be challenging for parents. The Children’s School Farm 66 emerged as a preferred alternative for these families, offering a safe and nurturing environment where children could engage in gardening under trained educators' guidance. The high number of parents requesting plots for their children demonstrates the recognition of the therapeutic value of gardening in promoting healing and improving overall health outcomes.160 In the Children’s School Farm, the designated plots on either side of the center path were specifically allocated to these children, ensuring accessibility and accommodation for their mobility aids, such as crutches and braces.161 The story of the paralyzed boy, as recounted by Henry Grisom Parsons, illustrates the profound impact of the Children’s School Farm on the emotional and psychological well-being of disabled children. Despite his physical limitations, the boy found solace and happiness in caring for the living green plants he considered his own. Even though he could only feel the leaves with one hand and relied on the assistance of others, the experience brought him a sense of fulfillment and contentment that surpassed the effects of other treatments.162 This anecdote highlights the therapeutic value of nature and gardening for children with disabilities, providing them joy, stimulation, and empowerment. Other therapeutic aspects gained notice. For example, A.L. Livermore observed that children with some diseases and coughs felt better while working in the gardens during the summer, underscoring the potential health benefits of gardening.163 School farms provided invaluable practical lessons for children to understand the importance of a healthy diet and offered the opportunity for children to learn about food production and agriculture firsthand. Many children may have only associated vegetables with grocery stores or market stands, but they witnessed the entire plant growth process through the school farms, from seed to harvest. 160 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education, 210. 161 Parsons, 208–9. 162 Parsons, 209. 163 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, School Gardens, 18. 67 Health lessons were vividly demonstrated by practical activities such as covering plants to deprive them of sun and air, allowing children to observe the effects on plant health and relate them to human health.164 By engaging in gardening activities, children with health issues not only had the opportunity to connect with nature but also benefited from physical activity, fresh air, and exposure to sunlight, which are known to affect health and well-being positively. Promoting Civic Values Henry Parsons underscored the significance of imparting practical life skills and promoting civic values as an integral education component. He indicated that being impoverished in a prosperous nation or ineffective among forward-thinking individuals doesn’t inherently stem from incapacity but insufficient education.165 This resonates with the belief that education should equip individuals to confront obstacles adeptly and contribute substantially to society. School gardens served as a platform for instilling in students invaluable life skills like critical thinking, efficient resource allocation, and perseverance. These competencies are indispensable for tackling societal challenges and adapting to evolving conditions. As Parsons said, “Today, the child plays in the garden. Tomorrow, it works as an adult. The direction given to its play today will decide how it will act in its work tomorrow.”166 Importantly, this approach to education emphasized learning through discovery rather than passive instruction. Children were encouraged to explore, experiment, and learn from their own 164 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1931 Manhattan Borough Parks Department Annual Report.” 165 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education. 166 Parsons, 10. 68 experiences rather than being told what to do by a teacher. This hands-on approach empowered children to take ownership of their learning process and develop problem-solving skills to serve them well in future endeavors. For instance, allocating individual plots to each child in the Children’s School Farm, where adults were not allowed to interfere, fostered a sense of ownership and responsibility among the young gardeners. Children developed a strong sense of self-awareness and pride in their achievements by having their own designated space to cultivate and care for. This sense of ownership was further reinforced by the opportunity for parents to visit their children’s plots during holidays, allowing them to witness firsthand the fruits of their labor and the skills they had acquired through their gardening endeavors.167 Similarly, the Fairview Garden School implemented a fee of 2 cents per week for each participant, serving as a symbolic gesture to instill a feeling of proprietorship among the students.168 By contributing to the upkeep of the garden through this nominal fee, participants were encouraged to take ownership of their gardening experience and actively engage in the school's activities. This sense of investment in the garden fostered a deeper connection to the space and a greater sense of responsibility among the students. Furthermore, the welcoming attitude towards visitors, including parents, kindergarteners, students from various grade levels, and community members, allowed children to showcase their accomplishments and share their knowledge with others. This interaction bolstered their self- confidence and promoted a sense of community and collaboration within the garden environment. 167 Parsons, 210–11. 168 James Ralph Jewell, “Agricultural Education Including Nature Study and School Gardens. Bulletin, 1907, No. 2. Whole Number 368,” Bureau of Education, Department of the Interior (Bureau of Education, Department of the Interior., 1908), 33, https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED542841. 69 Educators championed gardening as an educational tool based on the belief that children learn most effectively through hands-on experiences and practical engagement. By participating in gardening tasks, children gained useful skills and honed critical thinking and problem-solving abilities. Parsons’ work illuminated how seemingly simple garden activities, like transporting loads with a wheelbarrow, presented valuable learning opportunities for children.169 Through observation and trial-and-error, children navigated challenges in the garden, such as navigating uneven paths or overcoming obstacles. They grasped the cause-and-effect relationships inherent in their actions, discerning how different approaches influenced the efficiency of load transportation. These experiences enabled children to forge connections between their actions and outcomes, deepening their comprehension of concepts like transportation and efficacy.170 Henry Parsons also promoted an approach educators should take to encourage children to organize garden waste and make the most of every possible resource, reflecting a multifaceted educational philosophy that incorporates environmental stewardship, practical life skills, and problem solving. Beyond simply promoting sustainability, this hands-on teaching method instilled important values and life skills in children, particularly those from low-income or immigrant communities.171 By engaging in the process of sorting and repurposing garden waste, children learned the practical importance of resourcefulness and efficiency. They discovered firsthand how seemingly unusable materials could be transformed into valuable resources through thoughtful management and creative thinking. This experience helped cultivate a mindset of maximizing limited resources and seeking useful opportunities in everyday life.172 169 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education, 11. 170 Parsons, 11. 171 Parsons, 140. 172 Parsons, 140. 70 By integrating these lessons into the daily activities of the school garden, educators sought to empower children to take ownership of their environment and contribute positively to their communities. The emphasis on practical skills and sustainability reinforced that even small actions can have a meaningful impact, particularly in communities facing economic challenges. The United States School Garden Army In March 1918, the nationwide school gardening activities were consolidated under the name “United States School Garden Army,” expanding upon work initiated by the Bureau of Education in 1914. Initially limited by available finances, the escalation of wartime conditions, which demanded increased food production, facilitated the expansion of gardening activities.173 In a letter from P. P. Claxton, Commissioner of Education, to Hon. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the Interior, it was emphasized that the Bureau of Education had been gradually developing a plan for school-directed home gardening in urban and suburban areas. This plan, proven effective for education and food production, was imperative for immediate nationwide implementation to address the prevailing food emergency. The plan involved enlisting children aged 9 to 15 in systematic garden work for food production on available plots of ground near their homes, with teacher-directors assigned to supervise groups of garden workers.174 Upon request from Secretary Lane, President Wilson appropriated $50,000 from the National Security and Defense Fund to promote school and school-supervised home gardening among American school children residing in urban and suburban areas (Figure 12). Before this, 173 J.H. Francis, The United States School Garden Army. Bulletin, 1919, No. 26, 1919, 3, http://archive.org/details/ERIC_ED541192. 174 Francis, 3. 71 governmental agencies had played minimal roles in school gardening activities, which were primarily undertaken by schools and civic organizations.175 By July 1918, one million five hundred thousand boys and girls had enlisted in the United States School Garden Army, converting twenty thousand acres of unproductive homes and vacant lots into productive land. This initiative increased food production and alleviated transportation congestion by promoting home consumption of locally produced food. Additionally, it garnered support from teachers, boards of education, civic organizations, and parents, thus elevating the status of home and vacant lot gardening in urban and suburban areas.176 President Wilson allocated a second appropriation of $300,000 to sustain the work until July 1919. The report concluded that no other movement in history held as much promise for aiding the “back-to-the-soil” movement and emphasized the initiative's significant educational and material benefits.177 In 1919, the Bureau of Education also released The Spring Manual of the United States School Garden Army, which emphasized the responsibility and ultimate goal of the United States School Garden Army: providing food for the world's starving people. The mottos “A Garden For Every Child” and “Every Child in a Garden” underscored the Bureau of Education’s belief that every school should ensure a garden for every child and that every child receives adequate instruction and supervision.178 Although children's participation in the United States School Garden Army might not be regarded as the most substantial wartime contribution, it significantly fostered civic values among 175 Francis, 4. 176 Francis, 5–6. 177 Francis, 6. 178 United States. School Garden Army and United States. Office of Education, The Spring Manual of the United States School Garden Army [Microform] (Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1919), 4, http://archive.org/details/springmanualofun00unit. 72 the young generation. Through their involvement, children were imbued with a sense of responsibility to contribute to their country and a strengthened sense of patriotism. This gardening initiative taught young participants their role in the nation’s collective effort. It emphasized the importance of every individual’s contribution to the greater good, no matter how small. Additionally, the substantial participation of children in the United States School Garden Army was facilitated by the groundwork laid by the nature study and school gardening efforts at the turn of the century. Acquiring skill sets and learning about self-sufficiency and cooperation during participation in school gardens enabled children to engage in gardening activities readily. This underscores the significant role of education reform in fostering practical skills and engagement among children. 73 Figure 13: Join the United States School Garden Army, Edward Penfield, 1918. (Library of Congress, 1918.) 74 Conclusion Lower-income families often reside in packed tenement buildings in densely populated urban areas like crowded cities, where buildings line the streets and space is limited. Access to natural resources is scarce for children growing up in such environments. In immigrant neighborhoods like Hell’s Kitchen, poverty and hardship are prevalent, with instances of violence and starvation occurring daily. The establishment of school farms and school gardens in urban areas beautified the impoverished neighborhoods and provided a valuable opportunity for children to connect with nature. School gardening provided a novel and invaluable experience for children from low-income families. It allows them to breathe fresh air, cultivate their plots of land, and experience the joy of ownership and responsibility. While the primary goal of school gardens was to introduce immigrant children to the concept and virtues of American rural life and assimilate them into American society, their impact extended far beyond this objective. In addition to fostering a connection with rural living, school gardens provided a transformative educational experience for children, especially those attending schools with inadequate physical facilities. School gardens offered a welcome alternative in many public schools characterized by undesirable physical conditions such as dark, cramped classrooms, which could promote health significantly. Children could engage in hands-on learning in an open-air environment bathed in natural sunlight. Beyond imparting knowledge about natural science, school gardens provided children with a sense of empowerment and agency as they cultivated their plots of land and witnessed the produce of their labor firsthand. These experiences not only enriched their understanding of nature but also 75 instilled valuable life skills and civic values such as responsibility, critical thinking, and problem- solving. Thus, while the initial intent of school gardens in urban areas may have been to promote assimilation and convey cultural concepts, their true impact was in offering children from immigrant backgrounds a revitalizing educational experience that transcended the confines of the classroom. Through agricultural education and nature study, rural children could deepen their understanding of and appreciation for the natural world. Technical knowledge gained through agricultural education could enhance their ability to contribute to family farms. In contrast, hands-on experimentation with crops and other agricultural practices guided by teachers could foster critical thinking and problem- solving skills relevant to their future rural lives. Thus, nature study and agricultural education served as pathways for rural children to enrich their understanding of the natural world and acquire practical skills aligned with their agricultural heritage. Furthermore, during wartime, children’s participation in the United States School Garden Army shaped their sense of civic duty and responsibility. It helped them understand how their efforts could have a tangible impact on their community and country. The United States School Garden Army was a formative experience for the young generation, nurturing their patriotism and civic-mindedness. It contributed to creating a generation more attuned to the needs of their country and more willing to contribute to its welfare, both during times of crisis and beyond. 76 CHAPTER FIVE - MANAGEMENT, CHALLENGES, AND LIMITATION OF SCHOOL GARDENS Introduction To develop a comprehensive understanding of school gardens and the school gardening movement, it is vital to delve into the multifaceted elements that underpin these initiatives. This exploration begins with examining the training provided to teachers who manage school gardens or educators planning to start one. Additionally, understanding school gardens' costs and funding mechanisms is crucial to these projects' financial viability and sustainability. Equally important is the selection of plants, which directly impacted the garden's success and the student's educational experience. Furthermore, this chapter also considers the challenges encountered during the implementation of school garden initiatives and identifies the limitations inherent in these school garden initiatives. Training for Educators in School Gardening Henry Parsons recognized educators' challenges in implementing educational reforms, particularly concerning teaching elementary agriculture. Teachers often expressed confusion and frustration due to the subject's vastness, lack of preparation, and difficulty integrating it into the curriculum. Parsons acknowledged the need for practical solutions and working plans to facilitate the 77 incorporation of new subjects like agriculture into the educational system.179 To address this, multiple manuals and lessons were developed to support educators' endeavors. The success of school gardening initiatives relied heavily on the guidance of educators. At institutions like the Normal College in New York City, dedicated school garden clubs explored the study of natural science as it could be taught to children within a garden setting. Students at training schools, as evidenced by New York and Brooklyn reports, engaged in hands-on activities, including cultivating plants, especially bulbs, in boxes or pots at home under the guidance of their teachers. Training school received nature materials from the Children’s School Farm, including radishes, beans, beets, carrots, lettuce, and corn, which were utilized in these hands-on activities. Additionally, these future educators visited established school gardens like the Children’s School Farm at DeWitt Clinton Park to observe effective methods firsthand.180 Training schools were pivotal in preparing aspiring teachers to lead school gardening activities with enthusiasm and expertise gained through practical experience. New York Botanical Garden further supported educational efforts by offering training courses for teachers of school gardens. These courses for teachers were to present the pedagogical value of school gardens and guided the teachers how to integrate them into the curriculum without disruption seamlessly. The courses also composed garden practice and laboratory. Additionally, in a center of information on school gardens and farm gardens was established within the Park Department offices facilitated the dissemination of practical knowledge through lectures and guidance from experienced supervisor Mrs. Parsons, the founder of the Children’s School Farm, and her assistants.181 179 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education. 180 School Garden Association of New York, “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York.” 181 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1916 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 1916, 60. 78 Cost and Funding for School Gardens The cost of establishing a new garden can be manageable and not prohibitive, as demonstrated by the example at Public School 107. In 1908, the Board took on the expenses for essential groundwork, including stone flagging and providing a two-foot layer of quality garden loam in a 12 by 12-foot area. The total cost amounted to $80.182 This investment illustrates that with strategic planning and allocation of resources, schools could create conducive environments for gardening activities without incurring exorbitant expenses. Henry Parsons offered the estimated cost for school gardens for reference (Table 1).183 School gardening initiatives often relied on diverse funding sources, including public-private partnerships, to ensure their sustainability and success. In New York City, the Children’s School Farm at DeWitt Clinton Park received support from the Parks Department, which allocated a $5,000 fund in 1905 to assist the project.184 This demonstrates the commitment of municipal authorities to invest in educational and recreational initiatives that benefit the community. Similarly, in Yonkers, the Fairview Garden School received support from the Fairview Garden Association, established by the Civic League of Women’s Institute. This association assisted local tenements, highlighting the importance of community engagement in supporting school gardening efforts. Additionally, the Russell Sage Foundation played a key role by allowing the use of its building for social and club activities by the Garden School children.185 The collaboration between government agencies, philanthropic foundations, and community organizations was evident in the 1909 Fairview Garden School report, published by the New York 182 School Garden Association of New York, “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York,” 20. 183 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education. 184 Trelstad, “Little Machines in Their Gardens,” 165. 185 Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers and Livermore, School Gardens, 24. 79 Department of Child Hygiene with funding from the Russell Sage Foundation. This partnership model ensured that school gardening initiatives had access to the resources and support needed to thrive. However, challenges remained, as indicated by the School Garden Association of New York, which highlighted the absence of a special fund appropriated by the Board of Education for school garden purposes in 1909.186 This underscores the need for continued advocacy and fundraising efforts to secure financial support for school gardening programs. Recognizing the importance of school and home gardening in education, the Congress of the United States granted an appropriation to the United States Bureau of Education in 1915 to promote these activities in schools across various settings. This federal support reflected a growing recognition of the value of hands-on learning experiences like gardening in fostering holistic education and community development.187 186 School Garden Association of New York, “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York.” 187 American Nature Study Society. and American Nature Study Society, The Nature-Study Review : Devoted to All Phases of Nature-Study in Elementary Schools, vol. v.16 (1920) (Lancaster, Pa: [M.A. Bigelow], 1920), https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/128845. 80 Table 1: Estimated cost of school garden. (Henry Parsons, 1912.) 50 plot school garden - 1 teacher - 10 weeks (July, August, Sept. 15) 1 teacher at $2.50 to $4.00 per day, 60 working days $150 to $240 Seeds and fertilizer for 50 plots, $.20 to $.50 each $10 to $25 Tools, 10 sets at $1.50 to $2.50 each set $15 to $25 Sundries $25 to $35 Total $200 to $325 First preparation, man labor $25 to $25 Total 225 to $350 (Land, fences, building not estimated) For six months add salary again $150 to $240 Total $375 to $590 100 plot garden would cost 50% more or $562.50 to $885 500 plot school garden - 8 employees - six months season 1 head teacher at $100 - $150 a mo., 7 mo. $700 to $1,050 1 clerk at $30 - $50 a mo., 6 mo. $180 to $300 5 assistant teachers at $50 - $75 a mo., 6 mo. $1,500 to $2,250 1 laborer and handy man at $45 -$60 a mo., 7 mo. $315 to $420 100 sets of garden tools at $1.50 -$2.50 a set $100 to $250 Seeds and fertilizer for 500 plots at $.20 to $.40 $100 to $200 First preparation, $50 - $100 $50 to $100 Sundries $55 to $130 $3,000 to $4,700 (Land, fences, building not estimated) Wire fence 10c to15c a running foot Good fence 50c to $1.00 a running foot Tool house and shed, $50.00 to $2,000.00 81 Plant Choice for School Gardens For schools in New York, the fixed periods of summer and winter breaks posed a challenge in planning school gardening activities. It was essential to ensure that children could fully engage in every step of the gardening process, including harvesting. Planting crops that required harvesting during the summer break when children were away from school would disconnect them from the gardening experience. Therefore, it was more ethical and practical to choose vegetables that could be harvested when school reopened in September. Furthermore, long-term crops such as fruit trees, which take several years to mature, were unsuitable for school gardens. Given the transient nature of students’ participation in school gardening programs, it was impractical to invest in crops that would not yield results within the academic year. Instead, selecting vegetables with a shorter growth cycle allowed students to witness the complete gardening cycle from planting to harvest during the school year.188 Henry Parsons emphasized the importance of choosing appropriate vegetables for school gardening based on specific criteria. These criteria included rapid growth, low height to avoid shading neighboring plots, hardiness, common availability, attractive appearance, vibrant colors, superior flavor, and representation of various botanical families. By adhering to these criteria, schools could ensure that their gardening activities were engaging, educational, and aligned with the school schedule. He provided two lists of vegetables; one included radishes, beans, beets, carrots, lettuce, onions, and corn, and the other was for the schools that would desire to discuss botanical relations within them ( Table 2).189 188 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education, 135. 189 Parsons, 136. 82 Table 2: Plant List (Henry Parsons, 1912.) Radish Mustard family Carrot Parsley family (Weed) Charlock (some wild forms are poisonous) (Flower) Sweet alyssum Carrot (Vegetable) Garden cress Parsley family Watercress Parsnip Mustard Chervil Horse-radish Dill Turnip Fennel Rape Cabbage Lettuce Composite family Kale or borecole Burdock Kohl-rabi Thistles Cauliflower Chicory Broccoli Dandelion Collards Wild lettuce Brussel sprouts Onions Lily family Beans Legume family (Pulse family) Garlic Locust trees Leeks Wisteria vines Chives or Cives Clovers Alfalfas Corn Grass family Vetches Bamboo trees Peanuts The hay grasses Peas Wheat Beans Barley Rice Beets Goosefoot family Maize Beets Broom corn Swiss chard Rye Mangels Oats Sugar beets Millet Spinach Sorghums (Weed) Pigweed or lamb's quarters 83 Challenges of School Gardens Challenges in gardening education encompassed several issues, presenting educators with complicated responsibilities. In rural areas, teachers were not only expected to teach basic knowledge proficiently but also had to provide effective instruction in gardening, manual training, sewing, and cooking. Additionally, they were tasked with instilling in farm children a deep love for the countryside, so much so that they would be reluctant to leave it, which was the movement's primary objective. Beyond that, they were responsible for completing the other goal of the reformers, which was to enhance the country life quality and environment. These educators were expected to strengthen the school’s physical infrastructure, ensure sanitation, improve the school's decorations, and provide recreational facilities. Moreover, they were responsible for not only educating the younger generation but also the adults. They were relied upon to motivate farmers to engage in more efficient farming practices and encourage their wives to excel in homemaking.190 Furthermore, concerns persisted regarding the quality of teaching, both among urban and rural educators. Ongoing discussions among education reformers focused on introducing new teaching methods and educational concepts. Many teachers were deemed incompetent, lacking the proficiency or professionalism required to integrate nature study into their teaching practices effectively.191 While nature study, nature-centered education, and school gardening activities held enormous potential for influence and effectiveness, success relied heavily on the capabilities of the teachers. Despite the availability of manuals and instructional materials aimed at self-improvement, many educators struggled to achieve notable progress. Historic documents predominantly highlight successful examples of nature study and exemplary school gardens, yet failure was common due to 190 Bowers, The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920, 81. 191 Bullough, Cities and Schools in the Gilded Age, 31. 84 the lack of adequately trained educators. Frederick L. Holtz, chairman of the School Garden Association of New York, emphasized in the annual report the importance of seeking guidance from successful practitioners before embarking on school gardening initiatives. He specifically cited the Children’s Farm School directors as exemplary models to consult.192 There was a clear need for higher academic and professional proficiency levels among those involved in school gardening initiatives.193 Limitation of School Gardens The limitations of school gardening initiatives often stemmed from the backgrounds and perspectives of the reformers and supporters behind these movements. For instance, the founder of the first school farm in New York City, Frances Parsons, hailed from an elite family. Reformers like Parsons might project their ideas about childhood onto the lives of working-class children.194 Henry Parsons, son of Frances Parsons, discussed the importance of teaching practical life skills as part of education, emphasizing that inadequate education can contribute to societal inequities in his book. He noted that education should prepare individuals to navigate life’s challenges and contribute meaningfully to society regardless of socio-economic background.195 Despite efforts to include a diverse range of participants, including anemic, disabled, tuberculous, and convalescent children in school farms and children from Slavic, Polish, and Irish-American backgrounds in programs like the Fairview Garden School, the design and implementation of such initiatives may 192 School Garden Association of New York, “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York,” 30. 193 Bullough, Cities and Schools in the Gilded Age, 31. 194 Marie Warsh, “Cultivating Citizens: The Children’s School Farm in New York City, 1902–1931,” Buildings & Landscapes: Journal of the Vernacular Architecture Forum 18, no. 1 (2011): 66, https://doi.org/10.5749/buildland.18.1.0064. 195 Parsons, Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education. 85 not have fully considered the realities faced by marginalized communities. For instance, the curriculum designed and the overall approach to education through gardening might reflect the values and priorities of elite reformers rather than being inclusive of diverse socio-economic backgrounds. Even though the available historical record mentioned working-class children, immigrant children, and even the disabled children who participated in school farms were scarcely mentioned. The available historical narrative about school farms emphasized success stories and positive outcomes touted by educators while glossing over any challenges or drawbacks faced by students from marginalized backgrounds. This lack of representation could lead to a skewed understanding of the effectiveness and impact of such initiatives on all students, especially those from non-elite backgrounds. While children had been able to bring home produce grown in school gardens, it was essential to consider whether this was sufficient to meet their family’s needs and improve their quality of life. Additionally, the motivations and goals of elite reformers might have prioritized ideological agendas or social engineering over addressing the genuine needs and concerns of marginalized students. This could result in an emphasis on promoting certain values or ideologies, such as the nature study movement, without fully understanding how these initiatives impacted all students' educational outcomes and everyday lives. Despite school gardening initiatives having noble intentions, their effectiveness and impact might have been limited by the perspectives and priorities of the individuals driving these movements, potentially overlooking the diverse needs and experiences of students from marginalized backgrounds. 86 Conclusion The exploration of management, challenges, and limitations of the school gardens provided a more comprehensive of the school garden initiatives in the early twentieth century. In terms of training for educators, despite the availability of manuals and lessons, teaching quality remained a significant challenge, particularly in rural areas where the success of nature study heavily depended on the capabilities of teachers. The cost and funding mechanisms for school gardens revealed that while starting a garden was relatively easy, maintaining it was difficult without financial support from local, state, or federal governments. Although many school farms in New York City received support from the New York City Park Department, school gardens in public schools struggled. Even with contributions from private donors, many school gardens faced insufficient funding for ongoing maintenance. The limitations of the school garden initiatives were evident, as the advocates of these programs often came from elite backgrounds. This raises questions about whether these initiatives and curricula genuinely benefited marginalized children and families. Understanding the challenges and limitations of school gardens is crucial. It connects to the discussion in the following chapter on the decline of school gardens in the mid-twentieth century and how the core principles of school gardening endured in numerous ways in the subsequent years. 87 CHAPTER SIX - THE MID-CENTURY GARDEN DIVERSIFICATION Introduction Beyond the growth and decline of school gardens in the early twentieth century, the United States witnessed the expansion of various forms of gardening throughout the twentieth century, reflecting broader societal goals and norms. Home gardening became increasingly popular among middle-class individuals, who adopted mechanized tools and promoted scientific practices to enhance productivity and efficiency—an enduring impact of the nineteenth-century kitchen garden trend. During wartime, promoting subsistence gardens encouraged citizens to become self-sufficient, reflecting a national effort to bolster food security and support the war effort. These developments in gardens and gardening practices illustrate the diverse motivations and evolving practices in American gardening throughout the twentieth century. The influence of late nineteenth and early twentieth- century nature study, school gardens, and agricultural education also empowered the generation in varied ways. Decline of School Gardens That Existed in One Form or Other The appearance of school gardens in records and reports gradually declined in the 1930s, signaling a shift in educational priorities and societal trends. While the 1931 Annual Report of the Department of Parks Borough of Manhattan still mentioned nine school farm gardens in the borough, including the largest one at Thomas Jefferson Park,196 the closure of the Children’s 196 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1931 Manhattan Borough Parks Department Annual Report.” 88 School Farm in 1932 marked the end of an era for such initiatives in New York City. Subsequent reports, such as the 1934 New York City Parks Department Annual Report, did not mention any farm garden in the city, indicating a decline in school gardening activities. Researchers like Kohlstedt and Trelstad have pointed out numerous factors contributing to the decline of school gardens following World War I and their disappearance in the 1920s. These factors include changes in educational priorities, shifting attitudes towards vocational programs, and broader societal trends. Trelstad highlighted the influence of the withdrawal of federal support for school garden initiatives.197 At the same time, Kohlstedt emphasized the availability of alternative settings for children to connect with nature, such as summer camps, scouting movements, public parks, and nature preserves.198 Although federal support played a role, it was primarily associated with initiatives like the United States School Garden Army, which focused on promotion rather than direct funding. Civic organizations were often the driving force behind school gardening initiatives, with many projects funded privately or through collaboration with local government agencies like the New York Parks Department. While initiatives like summer camps and scouting movements may have been more accessible to middle-class and upper-class children, the development of public parks likely provided opportunities for a broader range of children to engage with nature. However, it’s essential to recognize that learning through gardening activities, particularly under the guidance of trained teachers, offered a unique educational experience distinct from simply playing in public parks. A 1921 editorial in the Nature-Study Review noted that readjustments following wars had resulted in the curtailment or elimination of school gardens due to necessary economic measures 197 Trelstad, “Little Machines in Their Gardens.” 198 Kohlstedt, “‘A Better Crop of Boys and Girls.’” 89 and shifting priorities away from emphasizing production.199 J.L. Randall, director of the United States Garden Army, highlighted the significance of gardening in urban education, particularly school-directed home gardening initiatives. While supportive of these initiatives, Randall acknowledged the financial challenges of maintaining school gardens relative to their crop value,200 suggesting that they may have evolved into other forms, such as home gardens or community gardens, in later years. Home Gardening The promotion of home gardening alongside city beautification efforts in the early twentieth century was indeed intertwined with the practices of school gardening. Both initiatives aimed to beautify urban spaces, encourage self-sufficiency, promote healthful recreation, and address economic challenges. The example of the Fairview Garden School distributing order cards for flower and vegetable seeds to children and their parents in 1909 highlights the interconnectedness of school gardening and home gardening practices. Schools extended their educational efforts beyond the classroom by involving families in gardening activities, fostering a culture of gardening and self-sufficiency within the community. The practice of home gardening complemented the efforts of school gardens, especially in areas where space and budget constraints limited the feasibility of traditional school gardening initiatives. 199 American Nature-study Society, The Nature-Study Review (Ithica, N.Y.: Comstock Pub. Co, 1905), http://archive.org/details/naturestudyrevie17ameruoft. 200 American Nature-study Society. 90 Public School 8’s implementation of home gardens in Richmond is a prime example of how schools adapted to their disadvantages by promoting gardening practices that could be carried out at home.201 Home gardens offered a practical solution for schools with limited resources, allowing students and their families to participate in gardening activities regardless of space constraints actively. By cultivating their garden plots, families gained valuable practical skills and experienced the benefits of cooperation and community engagement. Moreover, home gardening initiatives reinforced the educational objectives of school gardens by extending learning opportunities beyond the classroom. Through hands-on experience in home gardens, students could apply the knowledge and skills acquired in school gardens to real-life settings, fostering a deeper understanding and appreciation for gardening and self-sufficiency. Promoting home gardening alongside school gardening initiatives exemplifies a holistic approach to education and community development, where schools, families, and communities work together to promote healthful recreation, self-sufficiency, and environmental stewardship. The initiative to convert unused spaces in the city into miniature farms, facilitated by the Park Department’s support, aimed to reduce the high cost of living and promote healthful recreation. In 1916, the Park Department noted that arrangements had been made with the Department of Water Supply, Gas, and Electricity whereby permits could be easily secured to use the hydrants for watering purposes throughout the city.202 To encourage home gardening practice, the Commissioner had chosen Union Square Park as the ideal location to establish a “model backyard garden” in 1916. Union Square Park was accessible from all parts of the city, facilitated by converging various transportation systems, including subway, 201 School Garden Association of New York, “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York,” 23. 202 Department of Parks of the City of New York, “1916 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 58. 91 elevated, and surface lines. As a “model backyard garden,” it would serve as an exemplar of what can be achieved by private owners of small plots. Additionally, representatives from the department and the Bureau of Farm Garden presented throughout the 1917 season. They addressed inquiries regarding layout, fertilization, varieties of vegetables, and cultivation techniques and offered encouragement, for they were cultivating all available pieces of vacant land. Moreover, the New York Botanical Garden provided an endowment for giving regular courses of instruction in home gardening for those desiring to conduct their gardens.203 The shift towards school-directed home gardening or home gardening, gradually driven by economic factors and school rearrangements, led to a decline in school gardens but an increase in gardening practices in backyards and vacant lots. This transition reflected a broader trend towards subsistence gardening, which emerged as a response to economic challenges and a desire for self- sufficiency in New York State. The Subsistence Garden The emergence of subsistence gardens in New York State during the 1930s was a response to the economic challenges of the Great Depression. Subsistence gardens were originally incorporated into the Temporary Emergency Relief Administration program in 1932 with the support of the Federal Relief Administrator, Harry L. Hopkins, then Chairman of the Temporary Emergency Relief Administration.204 203 Department of Parks of the City of New York, 58–59. 204 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration, Report on Subsistence Gardens in New York State for 1933 (New York, N.Y.: Temporary emergency relief administration, 1933). 92 During 1932, garden projects were initiated by either public or private agencies in twenty-eight city and seven county welfare districts. These projects resulted in providing additional food for 14,292 families. Such success prompted further action, leading to fifty-eight city and twenty-three county districts incorporating subsistence gardens into their programs in 1933. This expansion benefited forty-one thousand one hundred and forty-nine families. The overwhelming interest and enthusiasm generated by these initiatives led to certain sections of the state receiving requests for gardens, even exceeding the capacity of local organizations to supply or properly supervise.205 The methods employed in subsistence gardens often differed from those used in regular farm gardens due to several factors, including limited resources and space. Recognizing this, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) created a bulletin tailored to the circumstances under which the average subsistence homesteader operated. This bulletin provided brief directions for growing approximately 20 of the most important garden vegetables, five small fruits, and five standard or tree fruits. By acknowledging subsistence gardeners' constraints and challenges, the USDA aimed to provide practical guidance enabling individuals to maximize their yield and effectively utilize their resources.206 Garden Project Types in New York State Four distinct types of garden projects were carried out in New York State beginning in 1933: Municipal, Home and Vacant-Lot, Industrial, and Community. 205 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 206 W. R. Beattie, Subsistence Farm Gardens (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1936), http://archive.org/details/CAT85826158. 93 Municipal gardens, predominantly sponsored by municipal organizations, were strategically located within walking distance of the beneficiary population, typically not more than two or three miles away. These projects utilized tracts of land large enough to accommodate fifty to two hundred gardens, each measuring one-eighth of an acre or 50 by 100 feet. The layout involved arranging the gardens in tiers, with narrow walks separating each garden from the next. Additionally, a three-foot- wide walk was provided between each two tiers. A supervisor assigned to each tract was tasked with allotting the gardens and providing instructions on planting procedures, timing, and locations based on a plan developed by the New York State College of Agriculture in collaboration with the Agricultural Advisor of the Temporary Emergency Relief Administration. The supervisor also oversaw the general maintenance of the garden and kept records of the harvest.207 Home and Vacant-Lot Garden In certain welfare districts, the demand for municipal garden projects was insufficient to justify their establishment. Conversely, in other districts, the available land was inadequate to accommodate all families interested in participating in municipal tracts.208 In such instances, families who could secure vacant lots or utilize their backyards were provided with the necessary materials by the Home Relief Bureau. Typically, these families were exclusively welfare cases and often performed the task of spading and preparing their gardens. This approach allowed families to engage in gardening activities even when municipal projects were not feasible, contributing to their self-sufficiency and well-being during economic hardship.209 207 New York (State) Temporary Emergency Relief Administration, Report on Subsistence Gardens in New York State for 1933. 208 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 209 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 94 Industrial Garden Numerous large corporations across New York State took the initiative to support their unemployed and part-time workers by providing industrial gardens. These projects were organized and overseen similarly to municipal gardens, often featuring plots of standard size, typically 50 by 100 feet. The active involvement of these industrial organizations deserves commendation, as their support helped prevent many of their former and part-time employees from seeking public relief assistance.210 Community Garden Community gardens were established as cooperative ventures covering several acres of land and cultivating various vegetables. Some welfare districts integrated community gardens into their municipal projects, especially when they had access to a community warehouse. The labor for these projects was primarily manual, with workers compensated by the state based on the same principles as other work relief initiatives. Each worker was allocated sufficient hours to address their budgetary shortfall. Upon harvesting, the produce was distributed among participating families or stored in a warehouse, where it could be distributed to relief clients as determined by the commissioner of public welfare.211 Prohibiting the sale of products from subsistence gardens was a significant aspect of subsistence gardening initiatives. This focus was kept squarely on meeting the needs of individuals and families 210 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 211 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 95 rather than commercial interests. This approach fostered a sense of community and mutual support, encouraging people to share their surplus produce with others in need. By promoting a culture of sharing and community support, subsistence gardening initiatives help individuals and families become more self-sufficient and strengthen social bonds within communities. This emphasis on sharing and collaboration reflects the broader ethos of mutual aid and solidarity prevalent during economic hardship, such as the Great Depression. The Enduring Influence of Agricultural Education The extension of gardening education beyond children to families and communities reflects a broader commitment to empowering individuals with practical skills and knowledge, particularly during economic hardships like the Great Depression. By allocating funds to train county leaders and former home demonstration agents in food preservation techniques, the college extension service sought to equip local communities with the tools to make the most of their resources, including garden surplus.212 Through workshops and educational programs conducted by trained individuals, families were taught various food preservation methods such as canning, storing, drying, and brining. These initiatives were inclusive and open to all interested individuals, including those with subsistence gardens and those relying on home or work relief.213 Collaboration between county, city, and community organizations, as well as social welfare agencies, facilitated the dissemination of knowledge and expertise in food preservation. Home demonstration agents played a crucial role in this process, working closely with welfare officials and 212 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 213 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 96 subsistence garden directors to offer educational programs and support to families across numerous communities in New York State.214 The involvement of State Colleges and college students in subsistence gardening initiatives reflects an integrated approach to agricultural education, echoing Liberty Hyde Bailey’s vision. Bailey emphasized that agricultural education should go beyond merely training individuals to be producers of commodities; it should also instill in them a sense of civic responsibility and commitment to the welfare of society.215 College students gained practical skills by engaging in subsistence gardening practices and volunteering to educate communities in food preservation techniques. They fulfilled their role as citizens and members of the commonwealth. Their contributions to these initiatives demonstrated an understanding of their obligations to farmers and the broader community, aligning with Bailey’s belief that agricultural colleges should serve the needs of their community. Conclusion Approaching the mid-twentieth century, the number of school gardens gradually declined due to various contributing factors. Alternative ways to connect with nature, such as summer camps, became available for children from middle- and upper-class families. Although historical documentation is lacking regarding how children from low-income families connected with nature, the rising number of public and state parks in New York State during the twentieth century likely played a role in facilitating this connection. 214 New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. 215 Cornell University College of Agriculture., Cornell Nature-Study Leaflets. 97 The popularity of home gardening practices encouraged people, particularly middle-class families, to beautify their homes and neighborhoods. Despite declining school garden efforts, students could still engage in gardening at home. Local associations and park departments advocated for home gardening practices and provided necessary support. The trend of home gardens also can be seen as a direct legacy of the mid-nineteenth-century kitchen garden trend, promoting health and emphasizing self-sufficiency. During times of war, promoting various subsistence gardens encouraged citizens to become self- sufficient. This effort mirrored the United States School Garden Army’s objectives, which not only supplemented food supplies but also fostered a strong sense of communal effort and patriotism. It is important to recognize the enduring influence of late nineteenth and early twentieth-century movements in nature study, school gardens, and agricultural education in home and subsistence gardening. These educational initiatives continued empowering subsequent generations in diverse ways, promoting environmental stewardship and providing practical skills beyond gardening. Notably, students who received agricultural education often volunteered in subsistence gardening initiatives, educating communities in food preservation techniques and reflecting the core principle of agricultural education—that those knowledgeable in gardening and farming should serve their communities' needs. Gardening remained a dynamic and integral aspect of American life. The enduring impact of earlier educational and gardening movements ensured that gardening continued to play a vital role in shaping societal values and behaviors across generations. 98 CONCLUSION This work sought to illustrate the interconnectedness of gardening practices throughout American history from mid-nineteenth-century to mid-twentieth-century, focusing on three parts: kitchen gardening, school gardening, and subsistence gardening. During the nineteenth century, amidst rapid industrialization, a nostalgia for the sub-urban ideal emerged. This ideal romanticized rural living and the hands-on work of farming, resonating particularly with the middle classes’ desire for a connection to nature and country life. Simultaneously, as modern metropolises rapidly developed, there arose a need to reconceptualize urban living spaces. Suburbanization emerged as a response to this transformation, driven by a range of factors, including America’s rural heritage and the demand for more residential space. The suburban ideal symbolized a spatial representation of agrarian values, offering residents closer proximity to nature compared to urban environments facilitated by advancements in transportation. Living in suburban homes enabled middle and upper-class individuals to enjoy the economic advantages of urban areas while reveling in the natural surroundings without engaging in farming for sustenance, as required in rural areas. The transition from urban to suburban areas was motivated by a desire for closer interaction with nature. Consequently, the aesthetics of suburban homes and gardens became intertwined with people’s expectations of suburban life. This aesthetic was influenced by the Romantic movement, which permeated American culture, reshaping perceptions of nature and influencing landscape design. In the nineteenth century, the desire to enhance home surroundings extended beyond the wealthy. Garden critics emphasized cultivating good taste based on suitability rather than wealth or property size, motivating owners of modest residences to enhance their properties. Andrew Jackson Downing played a pivotal role in popularizing landscape design, particularly among the middle class, 99 who appreciated the contrast between suburban and urban life. Unlike rural residents, suburbanites could enjoy gardening as a leisure activity, a fashion statement, and a way to connect with nature. The migration from urban to suburban areas, driven by a yearning for rural lifestyles, played a pivotal role in shaping kitchen gardening practices. This shift was heavily influenced by media publications, appealing notably to middle and upper-middle-class demographics seeking a healthier lifestyle and a deeper connection to nature amid the industrialization of urban centers. The flourishing seed industry of the nineteenth century, spurred by competition between commercial seed businesses and the Shakers, played a crucial role in facilitating kitchen gardening by offering customers a wide array of seeds. Kitchen gardening transcended mere practicality: it became a symbol of status for the middle and upper classes, reflecting their social standing and individual passions. Furthermore, kitchen gardening in this era had profound ties to ethnic heritage. Italian immigrants, in particular, embraced kitchen gardening to preserve their cultural identity and perpetuate the flavors of their native cuisine. Their contributions added a rich layer to the diverse tapestry of American gardening traditions. The motivation behind nineteenth-century kitchen gardening resonated deeply with the sentiments that fueled the later school gardening movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: a nostalgia for country living. This longing for rural life was significant, particularly amidst a period marked by a notable migration of rural populations into urban areas due to dissatisfaction with farming and rural living conditions. This migration wave contributed to the emergence of the country life movement, which sought to revitalize rural environments and elevate the quality of country living, encouraging individuals to stay rooted in rural communities. Education played a pivotal role in the country life movement, with advocates strongly endorsing the efficacy of agricultural education to revitalize rural society. They emphasized the importance of rural schools providing practical and relevant knowledge, instilling in students a sense of joy and 100 fulfillment in rural living. This educational philosophy manifested in initiatives such as nature study and establishing school gardens or farms, a tangible embodiment of the movement’s principles. In the United States, the evolution of school gardening practices can be traced back to the philosophies of educators like Friedrich Fröbel, Johann Pestalozzi, and John Dewey, and further developed by reformers such as G. Stanley Hall, Francis Wayland Parker, and Wilbur S. Jackman. Educators recognized the profound impact of hands-on learning experiences in fostering comprehensive development and understanding of natural sciences and agricultural practices. School gardens emerged as accessible and affordable additions to school facilities, offering children opportunities to engage with the natural world under the guidance of educators. Frances Parsons, Anna Comstock, and Liberty Hyde Bailey were instrumental in promoting school gardens and nature study in urban and rural settings. Their efforts, along with collaborations with institutions like Cornell University and governmental agencies like the New York City Parks Department, aimed to integrate agricultural education and nature study into school curricula. School gardens not only provided educational opportunities but also addressed food insecurity and promoted nutritional health among children and families, particularly in urban areas. School gardens served as dynamic educational spaces where students gained practical knowledge and life skills while fostering a sense of ownership and responsibility. Despite their potential, school gardening initiatives faced challenges, including the grand expectations placed on teachers and limitations in considering the diverse needs of marginalized communities. The establishment of the United States School Garden Army during wartime was built upon the groundwork laid by earlier nature study and school gardening efforts, highlighting the enduring impact of education reform in fostering practical skills and engagement among children. The participation of the young generation in the United States School Garden Army also contributed to 101 developing their sense of civic duty and responsibility and helped them to realize how their efforts could have a tangible impact on their country in order to foster a strengthened sense of patriotism. While school gardens may have declined in popularity post-war, their legacy continues to influence educational approaches and initiatives to connect students with nature and promote sustainable practices. The decline of school gardens in the 1930s marked a shift in educational priorities and societal trends. However, their legacy persisted through other forms of gardening initiatives like home or community gardens. School gardening practices were closely intertwined with home gardening initiatives, particularly in the early twentieth century when both movements aimed at urban beautification and promoting self-sufficiency, healthful recreation, and economic stability. Promoting home gardening alongside city beautification efforts aligned with school gardening goals, creating a symbiotic relationship between the two practices. Home gardening complemented school gardening efforts, especially where space and financial constraints limited traditional school gardening programs. Home gardens provided a practical solution for schools with limited resources, enabling students and their families to engage in gardening activities regardless of space limitations. The gradual transition towards school-directed home gardening or independent home gardening, driven by economic factors and changes in school priorities, resulted in a decline in traditional school gardens but an uptick in backyard and vacant lot gardening practices. This shift reflected a broader trend towards subsistence gardening, particularly in response to economic hardships such as those experienced during the Great Depression in New York State. The emergence of subsistence gardening initiatives during the 1930s was a direct response to the economic challenges of the era. The extension of gardening education beyond children to encompass families and communities underscored a commitment to empowering individuals with 102 practical skills and knowledge during financial adversity. The involvement of State Colleges and college students in these initiatives exemplified an integrated approach to agricultural education, echoing the visionary ideals of figures like Liberty Hyde Bailey. Bailey advocated for agricultural education that transcended mere commodity production, emphasizing the cultivation of civic duty and social responsibility. Through their roles as specialists and volunteers in subsistence gardening initiatives, State Colleges and college students exemplified this broader educational mission. By extending education beyond the classroom, they illustrated how individuals could make meaningful contributions to society, representing a sense of engagement and responsibility among citizens. The various gardening movements throughout history, from kitchen gardening in suburban homes to the nature study reforms and the rise of school gardens, all reflect a deep-seated nostalgia for country life and the virtues associated with it. This nostalgia stems from a belief in the virtue of self-sufficiency and the connection to the land that characterized agricultural societies. As society underwent a wave of suburbanization, with middle and upper-class families moving away from urban areas, the desire to maintain a connection with nature and traditional values became increasingly critical. Kitchen gardening in suburban homes allowed families to cultivate their own food, fostering a sense of self-reliance and a healthy lifestyle. The education reform movements, particularly the focus on nature study and school gardens, further reinforced people’s connection to the land and promoted the values of rural life. In the way of engaging children in hands-on gardening activities, educators sought to instill a deeper appreciation for nature and a sense of responsibility toward the environment. Later, the shifts towards subsistence gardening, including home gardens, vacant lot gardens, and community gardens, were seen as a response to the economic challenges of the Great Depression. Still, they could be seen as the desire to reclaim the virtues of self-made living. When society became more industrialized and urbanized, there was a fear of losing touch with 103 traditional values, and the agrarian way of life arose in people’s minds. These gardening movements reflect a longing for the simplicity and self-sufficiency of rural living and a desire to preserve its virtues in an increasingly modern and urbanized world. The personal backgrounds of key figures in the nature study and school garden movements could influence their advocacy and approach to these initiatives. Growing up in environments where gardening and a connection to nature were valued likely shaped their beliefs and priorities as educators and reformers. For instance, pioneers like Frances Parsons and Liberty Hyde Bailey, who came from elite or farming backgrounds, would have had first-hand experience with gardening and the benefits of engaging with nature. Their childhood could give them a deep appreciation for the land and a desire to share the joys of gardening with others, especially children. They were seeking to bring the benefits of gardening and agricultural knowledge to children who may not have had the opportunity to experience it firsthand. Their personal experiences might inform their belief in the importance of hands-on learning and the value of cultivating a connection to the land. Historic gardening initiatives like kitchen gardens, school gardens, and subsistence gardens offer valuable lessons for the present and future. They were integral to various movements, including the country life movement, nature study movement, city beautiful movements, education reform, and efforts to address economic challenges, promote self-sufficiency, and foster community engagement. School gardening initiatives naturally foster an understanding of the environment and sustainable practices without formal education. Today, as we face challenges like climate change, resource shortages, and waste management that particularly in the United States, where 4% of the world’s population produces more than 12% of its trash216, instilling environmental awareness and sustainability in the next generation is crucial. 216 “Trash in America,” Environment America Research & Policy Center, September 29, 2021, https://environmentamerica.org/center/resources/trash-in-america-2/. 104 The inclusivity and support for marginalized communities highlighted in historical school gardening practices remain relevant today. Institutions like Cornell University offer youth lessons and adult programs, but the lessons from past initiatives like the accessibility for disabled children in the Children’s School Farm can further guide efforts to promote equity and inclusion in garden-based education and community gardening. Teaching practical life skills through school, home, or community gardens can help address emergent crises like the recent pandemic. Gardening initiatives also promote healthy eating habits, which can combat obesity. Integrating school gardening into the curriculum, as Jackman did in the late nineteenth century with science and math questions, aligns with the current trend of STEM education. Gardening initiatives also promote mental health. Working in gardens can reduce stress and provide therapeutic sensory experiences. Historic gardening initiatives emphasized the connection between individuals and the community. For instance, the Children’s School Farm included a four-by-eight-foot observation plot represented the Irish community in the neighborhood fostering a sense of belonging and cultural exchange. Today’s school gardens and community gardens can create similar plots for different ethnic groups to celebrate diverse cultures and highlight the importance of diversity. Reflecting on the limitations and challenges of historical school gardening practices can inspire current educators to identify areas for improvement and innovation in modern gardening education programs. For example, more courses related to school gardening in teacher colleges and other education programs could established to provide adequate training for educators for these gardening initiatives. However, despite their significance, their physical legacies have faded over time and do not exist today. The lack of documentation and photographs about these efforts underscores the challenges of preserving the history of gardening practices for future generations. 105 It’s essential to accumulate information about these gardening efforts from historic documents to inspire the current generation about the importance of gardening education and to preserve the intangible heritage associated with these initiatives. By understanding the successes and challenges of past gardening practices, we can learn valuable lessons to inform and improve gardening initiatives, such as school gardens and community gardens in communities today. The history of gardening initiatives can serve as a rich source of knowledge and inspiration for addressing contemporary challenges and advancing the goals of education, agriculture, and community development. Through learning from the past, we can better shape the future of gardening education and its impact on society. 106 BIBLIOGRAPHY American Nature Study Society., and American Nature Study Society. The Nature-Study Review : Devoted to All Phases of Nature-Study in Elementary Schools. Vol. v.16 (1920). Lancaster, Pa: [M.A. Bigelow], 1920. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/128845. American Nature-study Society. The Nature-Study Review. Ithica, N.Y. : Comstock Pub. Co, 1905. http://archive.org/details/naturestudyrevie17ameruoft. Andrews, Edward Deming. The People Called Shakers: A Search for the Perfect Society. New enl. ed. New York: Dover Publications, 1963. Archer, Melanie, and Judith R. Blau. “Class Formation in Nineteenth-Century America: The Case of the Middle Class.” Annual Review of Sociology 19 (1993): 17–41. Armitage, Kevin C. The Nature Study Movement: The Forgotten Popularizer of America’s Conservation Ethic. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2009. Beattie, W. R. Subsistence Farm Gardens. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1936. http://archive.org/details/CAT85826158. Blossom, Harold Hill. “Andrew Jackson Downing Landscape Architect.” The American Magazine of Art 8, no. 7 (1917): 263–68. Bowers, William L. The Country Life Movement in America, 1900-1920. Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1974. Bullough, William A. Cities and Schools in the Gilded Age : The Evolution of an Urban Institution. Port Washington, N.Y. : Kennikat Press, 1974. http://archive.org/details/citiesschoolsing0000bull. Child, Lydia Maria. The American Frugal Housewife. 12th ed., Enlarged and Corrected. Bedford, MA: Applewood Books, 1989. Corbett, L. C. (Lee Cleveland). The School Garden. Washington : U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1922. http://archive.org/details/CAT31126367. Cornell University College of Agriculture. Cornell Nature-Study Leaflets. Albany: J. B. Lyon Co., Printers, 1904. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001666852. 107 Department of Parks of the City of New York. “1912 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 1912. ———. “1916 New York City Parks Department Annual Report,” 1916. ———. “1931 Manhattan Borough Parks Department Annual Report,” 1931. Dewey, John. The School and Society : Being Three Lectures. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1899. http://archive.org/details/schoolsociety00deweuoft. Dewey, John, Eric Thomas Weber, and Eric Thomas Weber. America’s Public Philosopher: Essays on Social Justice, Economics, Education, and the Future of Democracy. New York, UNITED STATES: Columbia University Press, 2021. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cornell/detail.action?docID=6146935. Doell, M. Christine Klim. “Gardens of the Gilded Age.” In Gardens of the Gilded Age, 1–10. Nineteenth-Century Gardens and Homegrounds of New York State. Syracuse University Press, 1986. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv64h7jw.4. Doerner, Paige. “Romanticism and Ruralism: Changing Nineteenth Century American Perceptions of the Natural World.” The Spectrum: A Scholars Day Journal 3 (2015). Downing, A. J. (Andrew Jackson). A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening, Adapted to North America; with a View to the Improvement of Country Residences. Comprising Historical Notices and General Principles of the Art, Directions for Laying out Gardens and Arranging Plantations, the Description and Cultivation of Hardy Trees, Decorative Accompaniments to the House and Grounds, the Formation of Pieces of Artificial Water, Flower Gardens, Etc., with Remarks on Rural Architecture. New York, London, Wiley and Putnam, 1844. http://archive.org/details/treatiseont00down. Downing, Andrew Jackson. The Architecture of Country Houses: Including Designs for Cottages, Farm Houses, and Villas, with Remarks on Interiors, Furniture, and the Best Modes of Warming and Ventilating. D. Appleton & Company, 1852. Environment America Research & Policy Center. “Trash in America,” September 29, 2021. https://environmentamerica.org/center/resources/trash-in-america-2/. Fairview Garden School Association. Yonkers, N. Y., and Henrietta Jackson Wells "Mrs A. L. Livermore " Livermore. School Gardens: Report of the Fairview Garden Association, 108 Yonkers, N.Y. [New York City: Dept. of child hygiene, Russell Sage Foundation], 1910. http://archive.org/details/schoolgardensrep00fair. Fisher, Chelsea. “Towards a Dialogue of Sustainable Agriculture and End-Times Theology in the United States: Insights from the Historical Ecology of Nineteenth Century Millennial Communes.” Agriculture and Human Values 35, no. 4 (December 1, 2018): 791–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-9874-4. Francis, J.H. The United States School Garden Army. Bulletin, 1919, No. 26, 1919. http://archive.org/details/ERIC_ED541192. Fröbel, Friedrich. Friedrich Froebel’s Education by Development: The Second Part of the Pedagogics of the Kindergarten. New York: D. Appleton, 1899. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001281264. Greene, M. Louise. Among School Gardens. New York : Charities publication committee, 1910. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.118055. Jackman, Wilbur S. (Wilbur Samuel). Nature Study for the Common Schools. New York: H. Holt and Company, 1894. http://archive.org/details/naturestudyforco00jackrich. Jewell, James Ralph. “Agricultural Education Including Nature Study and School Gardens. Bulletin, 1907, No. 2. Whole Number 368.” Bureau of Education, Department of the Interior. Bureau of Education, Department of the Interior., 1908. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED542841. Kohlstedt, Sally Gregory. “‘A Better Crop of Boys and Girls’: The School Gardening Movement, 1890–1920.” History of Education Quarterly 48, no. 1 (2008): 58–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5959.2008.00126.x. Kohlstedt, Sally Gregory. “Nature, Not Books: Scientists and the Origins of the Nature‐Study Movement in the 1890s.” Isis 96, no. 3 (2005): 324–52. https://doi.org/10.1086/447745. Loudon, J. C. An Encyclopædia of Gardening. 4th ed. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown and Green, 1826. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.69191. Loudon, J. C. (John Claudius). The Suburban Gardener, and Villa Companion. New York : Garland Pub., 1982. http://archive.org/details/suburbangardene00loudgoog. 109 Major, Judith K. To Live in the New World: A.J. Downing and American Landscape Gardening. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1997. Marsh, Margaret S. Suburban Lives. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990. Mozingo, Louise A., and Linda Jewell. Women in Landscape Architecture: Essays on History and Practice. McFarland, 2011. National Gallery of Art. “Picturesque - History of Early American Landscape Design.” Accessed March 20, 2024. https://heald.nga.gov/mediawiki/index.php/Picturesque#cite_ref-30. New York (State) Temporary emergency relief administration. Report on Subsistence Gardens in New York State for 1933. New York, N.Y.: Temporary emergency relief administration, 1933. Paine, Laura. “Hands to Work, Hearts to God: The Story of the Shaker Seed Industry.” HortTechnology 3, no. 4 (October 1, 1993): 375–82. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.3.4.375. Parsons, Henry Griscom. Children’s Gardens for Pleasure, Health and Education. New York: Sturgis & Walton Company, 1912. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924000682603. Parsons, Mrs. Henry. “The Children’s Farms of New York.” The Journal of Education 84, no. 4 (2090) (1916): 104–104. Sayre, Robert, and Michael Löwy. Romantic Anti-Capitalism and Nature: The Enchanted Garden. London: Routledge, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429293535. Schmitt, Peter J. Back to Nature: The Arcadian Myth in Urban America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1969. School Garden Association of New York. “First Annual Report of the School Garden Association of New York,” March 1909. Scott, Frank Jesup. The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds of Small Extent. New York: American Book Exchange, 1881. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006852235. Sturtevant, E. Lewis. “Kitchen Garden Esculents of American Origin. III. (Continued).” The American Naturalist 19, no. 7 (1885): 658–69. 110 The Brooklyn Daily Eagle. “Children’s School Farm ‘A Beautiful Work.’” January 18, 1909. The New York Times. “SAYS SCHOOL FARMS KEEP CHILDREN WELL; President Brannan of Bellevue Commends the Work at a Colony Club Meeting.” March 30, 1911, sec. Archives. https://www.nytimes.com/1911/03/30/archives/says-school-farms-keep-children-well- president-brannan-of-bellevue.html. Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. Boston: Beacon Press, 2004. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN =715802. Towndrow, Thomas. Suburban Homes: How to Obtain Them: Towndrow’s New and Comprehensive Plan of Association by Which Persons of Limited Means May Acquire Desirable Suburban Homes .. New York: T. Towndrow, 1875. “Transforming Education.” Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.ucls.uchicago.edu/post- detail/~board/125-anniversary/post/transforming-education. Trelstad, Brian. “Little Machines in Their Gardens: A History of School Gardens in America, 1891 to 1920.” Landscape Journal 16, no. 2 (October 1, 1997): 161–73. Tucker, David M. Kitchen Gardening in America: A History. 1. ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1993. United States. School Garden Army and United States. Office of Education. The Spring Manual of the United States School Garden Army [Microform]. Washington : U.S. G.P.O., 1919. http://archive.org/details/springmanualofun00unit. Warsh, Marie. “Cultivating Citizens: The Children’s School Farm in New York City, 1902–1931.” Buildings & Landscapes: Journal of the Vernacular Architecture Forum 18, no. 1 (2011): 64–89. https://doi.org/10.5749/buildland.18.1.0064. Zimmerman, Jonathan. Small Wonder. Yale University Press, 2009. http://www.jstor.org.proxy.library.cornell.edu/stable/j.ctt1npmc4.