Talk:Hunter College

Archives (Index)

2015 2016 2018

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Coordinated college?

This is a clearly-written history. As I understand it, Hunter College was academically rigorous from the start, standing solidly as a Normal school and then adding the Academic section. While later connected with CCNY (1945?) it expanded and advanced itself independent of a nearby "men's school".

Question: Ought Hunter College be considered a Coordinate College, like Vassar or Radcliffe, given its earlier relationship in the CUNY system? From the start, Hunter was academically rigorous, like the various coordinate colleges and apparently more so than the nation's vast number of private, vocational women's schools or even the other Normal schools. But Hunter's origin was fully independent, entering its later consortium as an equal, not as a previously-sponsored school.

It thus straddles a middle line. Should it be categorized as a Coordinate College? Jax MN (talk) 20:02, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Do reliable sources refer to it as a coordinate college? ElKevbo (talk) 00:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I've not reviewed this, as far as 'in print' editions that are RS. I simply do not know, as Hunter's formation immediately put it on solid footing. Other schools like this, with equally solid footing look more like the Vasser or Radcliffe models, but these were connected with their coordinated schools at formation. Hunter? Appears not. But Hunter does connect to CUNY much like Scripps is connected to the Claremont Colleges, or Wellesley is more informally linked to MIT. At formation, Hunter was vastly different from the typical "women's colleges" of the day, which were more vocational in nature. Jax MN (talk) 01:28, 29 October 2025 (UTC)