MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978581741 · doi:10.1891/1062-8061.14.203

Mildred Tuttle: Private Initiative and Public Response in Nursing Education After World War II

2006· article· en· W1978581741 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joan E. Lynaugh

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing History Review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattlePoliticsPolitical scienceHealth careNurse educationPublic administrationPrivate sectorSociologyLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I have long reflected on the complicated intersection between private sector initiatives and public policy, especially as it relates to nursing and health care here in the United States. We really have no overarching philosophy of health care in this country. Only rarely do we achieve political consensus leading to large-scale planned change. But we do muddle along, trying to respond to problems that strain the social fabric and worry us. One traditional approach to solving social problems is through private initiatives or projects undertaken by people or organizations with a special interest or stake in a given problem. These days we call interested parties stakeholders in a slightly pejorative way. But if these private initiatives can attract public favor, political support, and funding, they sometimes lead to significant policy changes. This paper is about a private/public initiative in nursing in the decades after World War II. This particular initiative helped stimulate the reorganization and redefinition of nursing education at midcentury. The paper calls attention to nurses who engineered it and the problems they encountered, and offers a glimpse at their impact on the present. A central but little-known figure in the postwar story is a nurse named Mildred Turtle. Her name is not familiar in the history of American nursing, but Mildred Turtle exerted important influence over the 1950s and 1960s from her position as director of the Nursing Division of the W. K. Kellogg Foundation in Battle Creek, Michigan. From 1943 until 1968, she oversaw grant making for as much as 20 to 30 percent of the Foundation's constantly expanding philanthropy. Almost all this money went to nursing projects in the United States, Latin America, and Canada.1 The long-standing involvement of the Kellogg Foundation with nursing is a larger story. For this paper, I want to focus on Tuttle's postwar plans for nursing. I am relying on the minutes of her Nurse Advisory Committee, her correspondence, and the recollections of participants on the Nurse Advisory Committee who I interviewed during the 1980s and 1990s.2 Mildred Tuttle and Post-World War II Nursing Mildred Tuttle was from Ohio. She began studies in music, but she ultimately earned her bachelor's degree in nursing at Western Reserve University in Cleveland. She practiced as a public health nurse for about six years before joining the Kellogg Foundation Community Healdi Education project in Hastings, Michigan, in 1932. Here she worked with Marguerite Wales, a leading figure in public health nursing from the Henry Street Settlement in New York City. In Hastings she met Emory Morris, a local dentist who also cared for patients in the Kellogg project. Later, Mildred earned a master's degree in education from Peabody College in Nashville, Tennessee, and did field experience at the East Harlem Nursing and Health Service in New York City. In 1940, she completed a second master's degree in public health nursing and returned to Battle Creek. By this time she was a well-known figure in public health nursing, well educated, and also well respected by the small group of local men selected by William K. Kellogg to develop his Midwestern foundation based on funds from his cereal company. When, in 1943, Kellogg picked Emory Morris, the aforementioned dentist, to be president of the Foundation, Morris in turn picked Tuttle to head the Nursing Division. Morris was very interested in nursing, and would fully support her efforts for the next twenty years. As World War II came to an end, a few nurses in the United States saw an opportunity to make sweeping changes in how nurses were educated and in the very nature of nurses' work. They saw that advances in medical knowledge and technology and rising demands for higher-quality health care completely overwhelmed the capacities of the existing hospital-based educational system for nurses. The American public was also interested in the state of nursing after the war. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0280.017
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0110.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing History ReviewSame topicNursing Education, Practice, and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207