This Oral History is copyrighted by the Interviewee
and the Samuel Proctor Oral History Program on
behalf of the Board of Trustees of the University of
Copyright, 2005, University of Florida.
All rights, reserved.
This oral history may be used for research,
instruction, and private study under the provisions
of Fair Use. Fair Use is a provision of United States
Copyright Law (United States Code, Title 17, section
107) which allows limited use of copyrighted
materials under certain conditions.
Fair use limts the amount of material that may be
For all other permissions and requests, contact the
SAMUEL PROCTOR ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM at
the University of Florida
Interviewee: Madelyn Lockhart
Interviewer: Katie Kindelan
Date: October 16, 2003
K: This is Katie Kindelan with Dr. Madelyn Lockhart at her home on October 16,
2003. First, thank you so much for agreeing to do the interview. Just to start
off, can you give us some information about where you were born and educated.
L: I was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, of Scotch-Irish immigrant parents, who
had five children. I was the youngest. We had no money to get to college, but I
won a couple of scholarships and went to Denison University in Granville, Ohio,
as a music major. Up until that point, I had 16 years of music piano training and
had played all over Pittsburgh, so I thought I was going to be a concert pianist.
However, after a short while in college I decided I would probably end up playing
in a cocktail bar, so I changed my major to economics. This was during World
War II when I thought there would be a lot of opportunity for economists. [I
thought] that business would be expanding after the war and economists would
be in demand, particularly those who were in involved with finances, which was
my major, the financial end of it.
K: So music was what allowed you go to college, coming from your background of
people who had not gone to college. Music was your avenue to get there.
L: That's right. Well, [I received] scholarships through music.
K: How and when did you become interested in economics? Did you choose it
because you thought it would be a good future? Were there a lot of women in the
field at the time or were you breaking ground?
L: No, there were practically no women in the field. The reason I chose it was
because I had worked in the summertime, when I wasn't in school, for brokerage
houses. I became fascinated with the investment business and got a lot of
encouragement from men that I worked for in that field that I should really
concentrate on the financial aspect of economics. I thought this would allow me
to be an investment counselor when I finally got my degree.
K: What are you involved in today?
L: Currently, I'm retired. Do you mean what do I do with my time?
L: Oh, well, I still do a lot of consulting, obviously I'm going to Brazil in December.
I've done a lot of consulting with universities. In town, I've been an officer in the
Retired Faculty group, I'm on the Smathers Libraries Board, I'm the treasurer of
the Alachua County Library Board, I'm president of my Homeowner's
Association, and I'm newsletter editor of the Florida Free Speech Forum. In my
spare time, I do line dancing and a lot of travel.
K: Why did you come to the University of Florida?
L: My husband got a job here and I had at that point two small children, six months
and two years old, and I was taking a year or two off to get them to the stage
where they could be cared for in day-care programs and allow me to go back to
work. I had worked at that point, not only at Ohio State University, but I had
been an assistant professor at the University of Kentucky and I had many, many
years of teaching under my belt, as well as a lot of research. So I thought I
could spend perhaps a year or two taking care of my children and then getting
back into the profession.
K: And how did you transition from going into economics to work in brokerage and
finance to going into teaching and the academics?
L: Well, when I got my masters degree I applied for jobs at all the major brokerage
houses, Merrill Lynch, First Boston and so on. I got very nice letters back saying
that they did not hire women in these positions. I decided the best thing to do
was become a teacher, a professor, and I went on to get my Ph.D. in order to be
able to do that.
K: When you were going through the Ph.D. program, were you were discriminated
against as a women in academia?
L: Well, I was the only woman in about almost one hundred men who were majoring
in economics at the Ph.D. level. I'm the only women, of course, that got the
Ph.D., many of the men did but some didn't. So I was kind of a sore thumb in
the group. I wasn't really discriminated against in any way, [but] it was a little
difficult to do some of the work because it was done in groups and the men didn't
always want to include me in their group. I didn't drink enough beer, for one
thing. But, in general, at Ohio State I was well-treated. I don't really have any
complaints about the treatment there. There was very little discrimination.
K: As you came to the University of Florida with your husband, in what capacity did
you first begin your career at UF?
L: Well, I had a research program underway at the University of Kentucky and at
Ohio State that Florida wanted. It was a methodology to measure income by
cities and counties in the state. This had never been done before, we'd never
had measures of income by cities and counties. I had done it for both Kentucky
and Ohio, and so they wanted me to do this particular kind of research. They
hired me, but in order to do so they had to hire me on what was called an
"emergency basis," so I was hired and fired every three months. I was given a
title of assistant professor, but I had none of the benefits thereof. I was not on a
tenure line. I had no retirement benefits. I had nothing. I was just a three
month employee and then I'd be rehired for another three months, and so on.
K: Was that more because of the position or because you were a woman?
L: It was because I was a woman and the wife of a faculty member, and that was
never done at the University of Florida. They never hired faculty wives. There
was a very strong rule against it and this one vice-president said to hire me on a
permanent position would be like putting icing on a cake. So you can see what
their attitude was. But they needed me, so they used me. After four years of
that, I said, unless you can give me a regular faculty appointment where I can
earn tenure and retirement benefits and so on, I'll quit. They didn't want to do it,
so I quit and went to work for the county.
K: What did you do for the county?
L: I was the first director of the Community Action Program under President
[Lyndon] Johnson's poverty program. You don't remember those days, but
President Johnson, in the early 1960s, instituted a program nationwide to solve
the problem of poverty. His way of solving it was for each community to develop
their own organizations that would apply for federal money and solve their
problems. So I was director of the Alachua County program, which was very
interesting because Gainesville at that point was highly segregated, the county
was surrounded by Ku Klux Klan. The attitude in the county for a white woman
to come into black neighborhoods was shocking. It wasn't to me; I had worked
with blacks in Ohio and Kentucky and Pennsylvania. That didn't bother me in
the slightest, but to the Gainesville community that was a very shocking and very
frightening experience for them.
K: Was the black community shocked as well, that a white woman would take an
interest and be willing to work with them, or was it mainly the white community?
L: It was pretty much the white community. The black community was a little
resentful that I wasn't black, but they saw that I had a possibility of helping them
and so they joined in most cases. For example, we set up neighborhood groups
all over the county, and with Sheriff Crevasse's help we kept the Ku Klux Klan
out. Many times I got calls from Washington saying don't go to Archer, the Klan
has moved in, and I would call Sheriff Crevasse and say I have to go there
tonight for a meeting in a black church, and you've got to protect me. He'd say,
I'll have a car meet you at the edge of Archer and take you on in. So we'd do it
that way and the police would not interfere with the meeting, but they would
protect me both going and coming because it was very frightening. The Klan
was not kidding, they would have attacked these black neighborhood groups.
I'm very grateful to Sheriff Crevasse for that kind of understanding and
protection. At any rate, one of the biggest needs was daycare for children.
Mothers were leaving their children either in the care of older children or even,
horribly, tied to a bed while they went to work. They'd have some food and
water for them, but the child would be tied to the bottom of the bed because they
didn't want the child to get into any dangerous situations. So I got some funding
from VISTA (Volunteers In Service To America) Volunteers. That was kind of
like the Peace Corps for the United States, where young people would volunteer
to come into a community and help. I got enough Vista Volunteers that we could
start twenty day-care centers throughout the county that would accept black
children. At that point there was one in Gainesville that would accept black
children, but no other daycare programs throughout the whole county. So we
managed to start twenty of them, which was a real feat. There were not only the
VISTA Volunteers, but the neighborhood groups themselves got excited about it
and mothers would take turns. They'd work four days and then work one day in
the daycare program. We managed to do that and that was, to me, a very big
accomplishment to help those women. We also stopped something else which
was horrible. In order to get welfare in this county, you had to stand up in front
of a public group and tell everybody why you needed the welfare, in public. This
was so horrifying to me that I worked with Social Services and got them to
change it so they could do it privately with individuals.
K: What year is this that you're working with them?
L: This was in 1964-65. Oh, we did a lot of other things. We took children out of
jail and got them evaluated over at Shands. I got to be so known at the jail that
they'd almost unlock it every time I came in. We started many other programs
that were just, they seemed like such small things at the time, but they had
repercussions in the community. Things like, for example, A. Quinn Jones
[Elementary School] was a black elementary school that had no playground in
back of it, it was just a muddy field. I got the county to pave it and put in
playground equipment. [I did] things like that, that weren't terribly significant, but
to the black community it was very important.
K: How were you treated as a woman trying to make those changes? Did you
have to go through different avenues and be helped in different ways, or were
you able just to come up front yourself and ask for those things?
L: Well, of course, most of the things that I asked for were from the county. I had a
very good relationship with the County Commission, and they were very
supportive and worked very well with me. The rest of the time, I worked with the
federal government and there was no problem there with being a woman. It
didn't make any difference what my sex was, they were interested in the
K: How did your role as the Community Chair under President [Lyndon Baines]
Johnson [U.S. president, 1963-1969] lead to your appointment on his Council of
L: After I got through doing research on what I had just spent all this time working
on, then I had time to write it up in research elements. This got the attention of
the Office of Economic Opportunity, first, and they asked me to be an unpaid
consultant. By this time I was teaching at the University of Tennessee, I had a
K: So this was before the University of Florida?
L: No, I left Florida because I wasn't getting anywhere here. They wouldn't hire
me. I left and went to the University of Tennessee, where they would hire me. I
had a full-time position, but, as a result of this research, President Johnson
appointed me to his Council of Social Advisors to develop programs in his
K: Can you give me the time frame for when you first came to Florida and later
L: Yes, I first came to Florida in 1958. I got my first position at Florida in 1960.
That's the position I described, the three months on, [and] then [I worked for]
another three months. In 1964, I left the University of Florida and went with the
poverty program, the Community Action Program, in the county. In 1966, I left
and went to the University of Tennessee on not only a full-time appointment, but
they promoted me to associate professor. So I was much better treated at
K: What was the difference? Was it just a different mind set? Was Gainesville just
L: Yes. You know, the university had only admitted women after World War II.
They didn't know what to do with women. They were so far behind, I couldn't
believe it. And, of course, they were terribly segregated as far as races were
concerned, and that wasn't true at Ohio or Tennessee.
K: Who was the president at the University of Florida at that time?
L: President [J. Wayne] Reitz [was the president of UF from 1955-1967].
K: Do you think the lack of encouragement for women came from the administration
down, and the faculty and the administration took the cue?
L: I think it permeated the whole university because a lot of the faculty did not come
from the North. A lot of them were southern trained, and so they were sort of
used to the system that the university had set up. Of course, it wasn't any
different than any other university in the South, other than ones like Tennessee,
which really is a border [state]. You know, Tennessee is different than Alabama,
Mississippi, [or] Georgia. It has got a little bit more of the character of the
K: So how did you end up back at the University of Florida?
L: Well, my husband at this time was not satisfied at the University of Tennessee,
so he took a visiting appointment at Ohio State, which I again went on to the
faculty there. He didn't like that situation, so he went to the University of North
Carolina at Greensboro and I went to Guilford College [Greensboro, North
Carolina] as a full professor. [We] traveled around the country like this, putting
our children in different schools each year. My daughter used to say, oh, it's not
so bad. They don't know me at this school, so they won't know all the things I
did wrong at the other one. But I was tired of the traveling around at any rate.
In 1970, we came back to the University of Florida and I got a full-time associate
K: So from 1958 to 1970 the mind set at University of Florida had changed?
L: [There was] a new dean in the College of Business, for one thing, from Michigan
State. He brought the northern mind set down.
K: It took almost twelve years for that to change. Were there more women faculty
in 1970? Were they all centered in one specific college?
L: Well, there were none in the College of Business; I was the only one. The social
sciences and the arts and humanities had women. I can't tell you if there were
any in the physical sciences, but I rather doubt that there were any. I didn't look
it up, so I don't know.
K: What was the reaction of your male colleagues when you returned and became
the first female professor?
L: They were fairly supportive. I didn't have any problem in the college when I
came back in the 1970s. I wasn't given as much of a salary as the males, but I
was only in the position for three years before the Graduate [School] dean asked
me to come over to the Graduate School. So in 1973 I became assistant dean
of the Graduate School.
K: In 1970, was your husband also a faculty member at UF?
K: So that changed also, where they now allowed husbands and wives to work in
K: So you taught for three years and then moved into administration. What was
that transition like for you?
L: Well, my son says, mom, every time you get into something you have to run it.
He's right. I guess I was born to be an administrator. I enjoyed it very much
over in the Graduate School because I could do two things, and the dean was
very supportive of both of these things. I could start minority programs and I
could start programs for women. I was supported by the dean in both of these
endeavors, and we had fellowship programs for both groups at the graduate
level. We recruited both women and minorities.
K: What was the ratio of women to men in the graduate school at that time? Was it
harder to recruit minorities or women?
L: I don't have the facts on that. It was very hard to recruit minorities because this
was a white school. I think this is still true, that you have difficulty recruiting
blacks because of the feeling that they may not be wanted here and that the
numbers are not large enough for them to feel comfortable. I think this is still a
problem. But, as far as women are concerned, there was no real difficulty in
recruiting them. We didn't recruit the women, necessarily, but we provided
fellowship money. The departments were recruiting them. So I don't know, I
would guess that the numbers of women were not overly large in the sciences
and engineering. I'm sure they weren't. There would be very few women in
those fields, but there were plenty of women in English and sociology and fields
in the social sciences and humanities.
K: Who appointed you to become dean of the Graduate School?
L: Well, I lasted from 1973 to 1984 as the assistant and associate dean of the
Graduate School, and then when the dean left in 1983 they had a search and I
was appointed Graduate [School] dean.
K: Were your salary and benefits equitable to the man that you replaced?
L: No, as a matter of fact they were so afraid that the faculty wouldn't accept a
woman Graduate [School] dean that they made me dean of International Studies
as well, so they could get two for the price of one. So my salary was lower than
[what] they would have paid a male dean and they gave me two jobs.
K: Who did you appoint to work under you? Did you have a male or female
L: I had two assistants-one was [a] black [male], who handled the minority
programs, and the other was a man who had considerable international
K: How long did you serve as dean of the Graduate School?
L: [I was dean] until 1993 or 1994. It was approximately nine to ten years.
K: What conditions prompted you to leave the position?
L: President Lombardi [UF president, 1990-1999, prompted me to leave]. He
decided that he did not want a separate Graduate School dean. He did not like
some of the things that I proposed, such as interdisciplinary programs. That
was one of my very strong proposals, that we engage in a lot more
interdisciplinary work at the doctoral level. He was not very sympathetic with
that, so he decided to combine the Graduate [School] dean position with the
vice-president for Research and make them one position. So the person who
was vice-president for Research went back to teaching and I went back to
teaching. The next person they appointed was a woman. She [Karen A.
Holbrook] is now president of Ohio State So she did very well for herself. She
left after three years.
K: You and Dr. Lombardi just had a different philosophy?
L: You don't know anything about President Lombardi?
K: No, he left, I think, when I was a freshman.
L: The students were very much in favor of him because he was very social with the
students. A lot of the alumni and people in town thought he was great, but he
[acted like] an egomaniac. If you tried to work for him or with him, if you didn't
do his way, you could just get out of the way. He was impossible to work with.
Most of the people who worked with him were "yes, people." If you had other
ideas, you could either shut up or leave, which is why he doesn't have a very big
position right now. He was fired, of course, from here.
K: He is at University of Massachusetts, Amherst?
L: Right, which is a minor school in their system.
K: You were at UF during a period of huge changes. What was it like when you left
as Graduate School dean in 1994 compared to when you began at UF?
L: Well, I went back to teaching.
K: What was the classroom situation like?
L: I never had any trouble in the classroom, although, in the Business College you
almost have all boys. The classes had gotten very large in the interim period but
I never really stopped teaching, because while I was Graduate [School] Dean I
got very much involved with the African Studies Center. I spent fifteen years
[traveling] back and forth from Africa, and I taught a course, all the time I was
Graduate [School] Dean, in African economics. Previous to that, I had taught
the course in economics of women, which I'm sure you've noted. We didn't talk
about the Women's Studies Program, but that is something else. But, at any
rate, when I went back to teaching I went back to teach not only basic
economics, but also my African economics course to MBA students. So I taught
for two more years before I retired.
K: We can move into the Women's Studies Program and focus on that. What was
your connection to the Women's Studies Program?
L: Well, I knew the people, of course, that were very much involved. They were
long-time faculty members whom I admired very much. We'd had close
contacts over the many years that I'd been at the university, and most of them
had been at the university for quite some time too. People like Irene Thompson
[the first director of the Women's Studies Program], Ruth McQuown [first female
associate dean in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at UF] and Maxine
Margolis [a UF professor in the Anthropology Department] all had their difficulties
with the university, which I'm sure you either know or you will find out as you go
through this. We began to feel that, in many fields, the contributions that women
made were ignored. I know they were in my own field. Nobody paid any
attention to the struggles that women had in the labor market, or the fact that not
only discrimination, that was one major part but most people accepted that, but
the fact that the cultural view of women was [that] they could work in the factory
during World War II but once the war was over you better damn well go back
home. [The idea was that] a woman's place is in the home.
That attitude was very prevalent, so, at least in my college, there was a sense
that we needed to broaden the curriculum to the point where we could include
some of the attributes of women. I came by this naturally, because at Ohio
State I had a woman professor in labor economics who taught the economics of
women. So it was sort of natural for me to develop that in the College of
Business. It was a shock to them. It was also a shock to the College of
Business that the majority of people who signed up were men, and it was a large
number. We had to move from a classroom to an auditorium-type room
because of the numbers, so there was obviously interest. Other women began
to develop courses in their [respective] fields. Out of all of this, we began to see
that there could be a women's studies center which would allow women not only
to bond, if you want to use that word, but also to begin to see course work in
various fields that might appeal to them.
K: Irene Thompson seems to be the woman who spearheaded the effort, and she
and Ruth McQuown went before the Faculty Senate. I know you served on the
Faculty Senate. Were you serving on the Faculty Senate around the same time
that they were making requests?
L: No, I was Graduate [School] dean.
K: When did you serve in the Faculty Senate?
L: I served in the senate before and after my dean position, but the Faculty Senate
doesn't have administrators, so you can't serve in the [Faculty] Senate as an
K: The Women's Studies Program was authorized in 1977, which is almost fifteen
years after Betty Friedan [author of The Feminine Mystique and cofounder of the
National Organization for Women (NOW)] and the women's movement. Why do
you think it took so long to develop?
L: [It was] the mind set primarily, which resulted in lack of support. Many people
[thought] bring women in and we'll teach them what they need to know. Why do
they have to go take special courses or associate in a center with other women?
We've got all the answers, so what's the point?
K: What conditions, do you think, made it the right place and the right time for the
program to finally develop?
L: I think it was the very strong feelings on the part of a relatively small, but
relatively vocal group of women; women like Ruth McQuown and Maxine
Margolis and myself who had been around for quite some time and had the
respect of the faculty. We weren't some kind of nuts that just came down from
New York City to tell people in Florida what to do. We were established faculty
members. We were full professors, so we had already paid our dues.
K: I know there was an advisory council for the for the Women's Studies Program
that you were a part of? How did that work?
L: Mostly, we met on campus and we did talk about what could be done and what
kind of courses could be arranged. We also talked about how we could
encourage other women faculty and male faculty, we didn't want it to be
exclusively women, and how we could include faculty in the program by getting
them to open up their curriculum to different kinds of courses. We didn't want to
rush the degree program until we had a strong foothold in the course curriculum.
Once we got that, we knew we would begin to look at degree programs. And
when the time came to look at the program at the doctoral level I had just left the
Graduate [School] dean's position, but I still had enough contact to be able to
push that through the Graduate School.
K: So you started out with courses, and then moved on to a degree program, and
then to a doctoral [certificate program]?
K: Were there any institutional barriers to the development of the program? How
did the administration feel about it and what kind of things did you have to do to
get it done?
L: Well, I'm sure there are others who can give you even more information than I on
the barriers. There was certainly a funding barrier. Nobody wanted to put
much funding into it, so a lot of it operated on a shoestring. Ruth McQuown's
position as associate dean in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences helped a
lot, because she was very widely respected. She was able to help as far as
funding was concerned, but there was mighty little of it. A lot of it was done
simply by faculty taking on extra courses.
K: What changes in the program occurred during your time on the Advisory Board?
L: Growth in the number of courses, the number of faculty involved, the number of
students that were not only taking courses in this area but also were considering
a concentration in this area, and, of course, the development of the degree
program [were all changes that were taking place at this time].
[End side Al]
K: Who took the Women's Studies courses initially? Did you have any enrollment
L: Mostly women [enrolled for the courses], except for courses such as the one I
described in the College of Business where it was primarily men. But over a
relatively short period of time men began to filter into some of these courses.
Some of the courses were courses that men might not, in large numbers, take.
An economics course, you can imagine, men might take more than they would
take a sociology course or a course in the humanities.
K: What do you think drew the men in to take the classes?
L: Well, I know what drew them to the course I taught because they told me. They
said, we know we're going to have to deal with women in business and so we
want to know what is on their minds. I'm not sure that they found out, but I could
see their point. They knew that there were going to be women under them and
over them in the business world.
K: How did you use your knowledge and experience in administration to help the
program develop a curriculum, obtain funding, and attract students? Did you
have more insight?
L: Well, I mentioned Ruth McQuown as an administrator as well. If you're an
administrator, you do have a little bit of an in with the administration. As a
faculty member, you are [part] of a larger group, whereas an administrator stands
out as a separate entity. So I suppose that visibility, if you want to call it that,
was of some advantage. But also, in my case, breaking into a field like
business, since I was already a faculty member in the college, it made it easier
for me to break into the College of Business than it would have been had I been
a professor in some other field.
K: What about serving on the Faculty Senate?
L: To be perfectly honest with you, my experience at this university has been that
the Faculty Senate has been about as big a flop as anything on the campus.
The faculty has not taken the strong positions in many cases that I thought it
could have and should have. Part of the reason, at least during Lombardi's rule,
and I understand before that, is that the president of the university served as the
president of the senate. Now if you're going to have a free-wheeling senate, you
don't want the president serving as president or even to be in the room. You
don't want administrators to put the cramp on your discussions. So maybe that
is the reason the senate has been so lacking in its willingness to stand up at the
university and scream about some of the things I think they might have
influenced had they done so.
K: How do you think the Women's Studies Program has changed? How involved
are you still today?
L: I'm not involved anymore, obviously, on a day-by-day basis or even a
week-by-week basis. I do have an endowment program that I put into the
Center [for Women's Studies and Gender Research at the University of Florida],
which I'm sure you know about. So that is some involvement. At least my
money is involved, which indicates my like of the program and my hope that it
can be strengthened. It has grown into a very respectable program on the
campus. The Center [for Women's Studies and Gender Research at the
University of Florida] has broadened its scope over the years. We've had
excellent leadership, not only from those in the Center directly, but also from the
faculty that have been part of this program for all the years that it has been in
existence. And I think it will continue. It's not a fad. Many people thought it
was going to be just a fad, once women got into some of these fields we could
forget about women's studies. I don't think so. I think there is a real purpose
for it and it will continue and I hope [it will] grow.
K: I know some of the other founders of the program have said their hope is that it
would dissolve because then women's studies would be integrated on a course
L: Well, I hope that, as far as course work is concerned, that we do integrate
women's activities more into course work. I am thoroughly in favor of that, but
women in our society are growing in a different way than just integrating. We
are growing to be a dominant part of this society. We aren't just integrating like
a minority group into a majority. Forget it. We're beating the majority in many
cases. That is why I think we need this kind of encouragement for young
women who perhaps don't have the experiences over the years that I have had,
which makes me perhaps a little more of a fighter because I've had to fight some
battles. But I think that there are other battles that young women today are
going to have to fight, and this is not a done deal by any means. Although I am
perfectly willing to concede that we need to integrate more women's activities
into every course that we teach, I still think that there are ways that we can
encourage women to not integrate into society but become society. Let the men
worry about integrating.
K: What kind of role will women have in the future? What kind of future do you see
for women and how do you think the program will adapt to serve that future?
L: Well, women will definitely have a stronger academic role on this campus and on
most campuses than they have ever had before because they are outnumbering
men, and I think that will continue. They are also outnumbering men in many
other ways. But even the areas where they are not outnumbering men, such as
engineering, they are still becoming a very large part of the total group. I think
they'll influence that group, because they will be, if not the majority, at least a
predominant part of the total. So I think that in the future the role of women's
studies may not be just to aid women to take their proper place in the various
academic fields, but it may be to teach men what I think the men were looking for
in my course, how to integrate themselves into a world where women are
K: Well, I want to go back to the faculty and how you think the program, as it grew
and developed, impacted attracting women faculty to the university, but not
necessarily to teach women's studies. Do you think that had any kind of impact
on the campus as a whole?
L: Well, if it did I don't know what it did. Most women don't come to a university
because they want to work in a women's studies program. They come for a
multitude of reasons, but that wouldn't be one of them. You come because you
see an opportunity in a field that you wish to work in and feel that you wish to
develop. You see a university that you want to live with for a period of years,
and you see a non-discriminatory pay schedule that you can live with. I don't
think, for example, women chemists coming to this university would come
because of a women's studies center. However, once having made the decision
to at least look at the University of Florida, they might be grateful that there was a
women's studies program where they could find other women faculty that might
have similar interests outside of their professional interests.
K: The Women's Studies Program brought a lot of prominent females like Gloria
Steinem [famous feminist and co-founder of Ms. Magazine] and Flo Kennedy
[Florynce Rae Kennedy, black civil rights activist and feminist] to come and
speak. What kind of effect did those speakers have on the community and on
L: Yes, they drew relatively large crowds. I don't remember any protests. I'm sure
there were a lot of people that thought it was pretty crazy to invite such people to
the campus because they were not in favor of whatever they were saying, but
there were no violent protests of any kind. They drew fair numbers of people,
K: How else did the program interact with the Gainesville community?
L: I really don't know. As far as I know there has been very little interaction. But
I'm not the one to ask that question, because I have not been aware of any
activities over the last couple of years. There may have been a good many
activities that I'm just not tuned into.
K: When you were forming the program, was there any opposition in the community
or did the opposition mainly just stay on campus?
L: No, there was no opposition. Of course, there is never any opposition in this
community for anything the university does unless it's a riot downtown or
something like that. There is very little knowledge in the community of what
goes on in the campus. The County Commission doesn't know much about the
university, where it is growing or what it isn't doing. Everybody has commented
on how loose the town and gown relationship is and how we should tighten it up
and be more involved, one with the other. As far as the people on the campus
itself, now that the Women's Studies Program has been in existence for quite
some time, I don't think there is any adverse reaction from any of the faculty.
But again, I'm not on campus every day so I don't really know.
K: In the early years of the program, did you do a lot to interact with different
departments and different centers on campus? Did you have to go out and sell
the program or were you just focused on developing the curriculum and getting
the administration's approval?
L: My concern was with [the] curriculum and the degree programs. I did not go out
and convince the faculty of anything. I think by a women being [the] Graduate
[School] dean, I was the first women to hold any position in the overall
administration of the University of Florida, so that in itself was a shock. Once
the faculty recovered from that shock, I don't think anything I did with women's
studies would have shocked them.
K: As an administrator, who you did you use as an example or a mentor to pave
your way? Did you have anyone to look to, to see how they did things and how
you adapt and survive in that environment, or did you just do it on your own?
L: [I went] on my own. I had a lot of support from a lot of faculty. I think I was
pretty well-liked, so a lot of the faculty were very supportive and very nice. But I
didn't have a role model that I was following because I had never been under a
graduate dean. Graduate deans had always been male, and some of them, I
presume, were pretty good; but when you're a faculty member, you don't deal
with the graduate dean very often. Graduate deans deal with other deans and
department chairs and graduate coordinators, they don't deal with faculty.
K: Did you have problems with being responsible for people below you? Did you
have difficulties with any male department chair who had trouble taking orders or
advice from a female dean?
L: Amazingly, I had very, very little trouble with male department chairs, deans,
[and] graduate coordinators. I had a very good relationship with almost all of
them. The only college I had any difficulty with at all was one college over in the
medical area where there were too many sexual harassment cases. It got to the
point where I would have to go over and speak to the faculty and say, you know,
you're being bad boys, you can't do this anymore. There were very serious
cases. One girl committed suicide, so it was not a fun situation. We weren't
kidding here. It was very serious, but the dean and many of the faculty and the
upper administration were not taking it as seriously as they should have.
K: How did you deal with that?
L: Well, I tried to be supportive of the young women and I tried to attack the male
faculty as hard as I could, but without support from the upper administration there
is not much you can do.
K: So you did not feel a lot of support from the president?
L: Oh God, no. In fact he promoted one of the faculty members that was
K: And what year was this?
L: [This was in] 1991 or 1992, somewhere along in there. The [Academic]
Personnel Board [a group of ten tenured faculty members who are appointed by
the president and who do not have administrative appointments] turned down
this faculty member and said he should not be a full professor because of the
way he treats women students. President Lombardi promoted him over the
[Academic] Personnel Board's refusal, so, so much for sexual harassment.
K: You mentioned your work with the Center for African Studies. What was your
role with that, and how did that compare to the Women's Studies Program? Did
you face any of the same difficulties in terms of getting established and getting
L: No. I worked with a national organization, the African American Institute (AAI)
that was funded by USAID [United States Agency for International Develpment].
The [Board] was [made up of] graduate deans from all over the country that were
on that board, and we went to Africa and recruited students with federally-funded
fellowships. The group was mixed; the graduate deans were female and male.
That was a very enjoyable time of my life. Those trips to Africa were very
interesting. My first trip to Africa was for the African Studies Center [at the
University of Florida], and they sent me to Africa for nine months to go to nine
different countries. They had no contacts. I had to make the contacts on my
own, and the purpose of my trip was to make contacts with universities in nine
different African countries, which is what I did for nine months. I spent
approximately one month in each one of nine countries and went to the
universities there and went to the government agencies and tried to wind my way
around to find out what we could do in terms of cooperation with the University of
Florida. One of the very good programs that we established as a result of that
was in Uganda, where I convinced the law school to set up a program at the
university in Kampala, Makerere University, to teach constitutional law. This
was when Idi Amin [a Muslim who rose to rule Uganda in 1971, his dictatorship
was responsible for an estimated 300,000 deaths] had left Uganda and the
people were trying to establish a constitutional government and write a
constitution, and they needed help. So our law school started an exchange
program in Kampala, and it has been still going on. It is very successful. So it
was a very rewarding trip, although it was frightening as hell. To be a women
alone and have no contacts in all those areas where I knew no one, [to] just go
barging in and find somebody, [was a scary experience]. But I was very well
treated and it was a wonderful trip.
K: So you did that for nine months?
L: That was after I left the graduate school. I had another period in between
assistant dean and dean where I had a year's leave, and that is what I did with it.
K: Let's go back to the class you taught on women and economics. What did the
class focus on? How do you think the relationship between economics and
women, the partnership, has evolved over time from when you taught the class to
how you would teach it today?
L: Well, I wouldn't have to do so much explaining today that women [are] capable of
being administrators and managers, because they are. Today's business world
has a lot of women investment counselors [and] women managers. My son,
who is a vice-president at IBM, has a woman boss. This sort of thing has
evolved over the years, so that would not be a strange thing to talk about. What
we would talk about today is the differentials in wages, where in spite of the fact
that we have made all of these improvements, women are still paid about
seventy cents on the dollar. So there is wage discrimination and there is still a
certain amount of discrimination for upward mobility. Even on this campus, we
still have some of that problem, although it is certainly a lot less than it was in the
past. All of these problems have been ameliorated over the years, but
sometimes they still exist. I think the people who are in the college still have to
recognize that some of the fields that women go into are going to be
non-traditional. Women are going to be financial advisors. I think men need to
have that aspect taught to them. However, I think you could integrate what I
would teach in the economics of women into a regular economic course now, a
course on labor economics, and be just as successful as a separate course. I
don't think it is as necessary now as it was in the past. If it was taught by a
woman who would make this effort, there is room in labor economics to teach
what I taught in this course and what is necessary and what was taught to me at
Ohio State in the 1940s. So I think we have finally caught up.
K: You received an award from the Women's Studies Program in 2002.
L: [I won] an Uppity Woman Award.
K: Can you talk about that?
L: Well, I didn't know they were going to give it to me, but I guess I am an uppity
woman. I didn't stay in my place. I was always pushing out of my place.
K: Can you think of any issues we did not discuss?
L: Well, I think the other thing that men need to realize, and I think they are
becoming more and more aware of it, is that women can have a family and still
be completely professional in their lives, in their work, and their activities. I have
two children and I managed to raise them, I think, properly. They are very
successful human beings with their own families, and I don't think that they were
harmed one bit by my professional activities. In fact they may have gained from
them. There is no harm in picking up your child from school and saying, you
study in the library this afternoon because I've got work to do.
K: I know Irene Thompson, in her interview, described discrimination against hiring
married women because they knew they would have children and would leave.
Did you face those same problems after the birth of your children?
L: Well, not at Ohio State, because they had a very different view. I had my two
children in Columbus while I was at Ohio State, and all they did was say, well,
you probably should take a quarter off to have the baby, or if you need somebody
to teach your courses for a few weeks we can arrange that. It was no problem
there at all. When I came down here, of course, I didn't teach until my children
were at the stage where they could be put into a daycare center for a period of
time or I could hire someone to be at home with them. But most men felt that
you could not successfully do both, and I think many men were sort of shocked
that it could be done. Of course it could be done. It has been done before.
My answer to all of them was if you think that your mother, just because she
didn't go off to work, didn't work her tail off, that she had time to sit around a pay
attention to you, you're out of your mind. Most women worked very, very hard in
the past, whether they were out of the house or not. I know my own mother ran
a boarding house in order to be able to support us. So, it wasn't that women
didn't work, it's just that they didn't work someplace else.
K: They didn't work nine to five outside of the house.
L: They didn't work nine to five, they worked nine in the morning to eleven at night.
So I think there is always a bit of shock for men to realize that because they did
so little themselves in terms of child rearing. I think they're doing more today
than they did in the past, but, even today, I see my son and my son-in-law, and
the big burden of the children is on the two wives. My daughter is a full-time
faculty member at the University of New Hampshire and she still has to take care
of her two children herself, primarily.
K: Do you think that will ever change, or do you think that is society's view of the
mother as the nurturer?
L: Well, men are becoming more involved. They're picking up children more from
various activities, and even learning to change diapers on occasion. I think
they're becoming more involved. And the ones that do become involved, of
course, find out the joy of becoming involved with your children, so that may
encourage them in the future. But a lot of men's work is not only full-time, it
makes them travel and their time becomes very difficult to manage. So I don't
know that it is going to change dramatically.
K: What do you think some of the practical applications of women's studies are?
Do you think it helps with things like changing minds and changing stereotypes?
L: Yes, that is one of the major reasons for it, to change the stereotypes and to
indicate that life is a cooperative venture, not just between men and women but
between women and women. Males depend on each other and women depend
on each other too. I think this needs to be emphasized continuously. There is
something else, I think, that I would consider important. If a women's studies
center is on your campus, it indicates that university thinks something about
women. If nothing else, it is a wonderful symbol. I hope it is a lot more, but as
a symbol of what the university feels about the importance of women, I think it is
a very good symbol. Not that I think we need a male center just to make people
think that males are important, but we have centers for other minority groups.
[We have] Hispanic centers, black centers, [and] Indian centers. I think that
women studies has a much broader agenda than some of these other centers,
but again I would say that it is important to emphasize women.
K: What do you think the link is between women's studies and feminism?
L: Oh, I don't know. You know, I have never been much into the feminist business.
I've been too busy being what I am. I don't know if I am a feminist or not. I am
for equality, and if that means I am a feminist, okay, then I am. But I really
haven't been much into pushing that agenda. I have been much more
interested in bringing girls up to the level where they can compete favorably with
anybody. You don't have to be a feminist to be a chemist, but you can be a darn
good representative of women in the chemistry field.
K: Well, that concludes my questions. Do you have anything else to add?
L: Well, we've covered a lot of territory. I enjoy, tremendously, being a faculty
member. I enjoy teaching. I enjoy being an administrator, which is why when I
get into these groups I start running them. I like to run things because I like to
manage, I like that aspect of organization.
K: Did you all have any conflict with who became the leader of the Women's Studies
Program, because I'm sure there were a lot of strong personalities in that group.
L: Oh, no, not that I know of. If there was, then I don't know about it. Yes, every
single one of those persons was a strong personality, but we were all very, very
good friends. I mean not just casual friends, we were very deeply good friends.
I don't know anyone one of those women that I could [not] say I don't admire
tremendously. I'm sure that they feel strongly that I was a good friend, and they
certainly were good friends to me. It was a strong admiration of each other, and
we all brought different qualities to it. In spite of our strong personalities, we had
some strengths to contribute. I admire strong people, unless they're
egomaniacs. People who can get things done and go straight to the point, I
admire that kind of person.
K: That is how you have accomplished all the things that you have.
L: I think you keep busy, you don't quit. I think you find life very satisfying, not just
looking back but looking forward. I have got a lot of things left to do. But I
came from immigrant parents. My mother came to this country when she was
sixteen years old with no relatives here, nobody. She just came on her own.
She had a high school education and she managed to learn enough so that when
she finally got married she was secretary to the president of the Pennsylvania
Railroad in Pittsburgh. She had worked her way up from a clerk.
K: So you got your spirit from her.
L: Then she took on a husband with four children, he was widowed, and had
another child of her own. As I said, she ran a boarding house and raised us all
very well. So I had a very strong mother. If I ever needed to learn anything
about keeping going, I certainly had her as my model.
K: How did your children react to your involvement and your activism, from women's
studies to your work with President Johnson? How do you think that shaped
L: Oh, I think it shaped them a lot. In the first place, I took them to various places
when I would go. I took them, for example, to Washington when the Poor
People's March went to Washington, and they saw it. I took them to other
conferences where they could hear things that might not have always been
understandable to them but which had an effect on them. They've traveled all
over the world with me, so they've become very broad in terms of their cultural
involvement with the rest of the world. They've got a very broad view, and
they're interesting people because of that. Not just because they're my children,
but they are interesting to other people. My daughter, for example, is a
professor of anatomy and physiology, but she is also an EMT [Emergency
Medical Training] on the ambulance service. So they are very active people that
I think will contribute to their children's lives as well.
K: Well, thank you very much. I learned a lot.
L: Well, I appreciate you coming to talk to me.
K: Thank you.
October 16, 2003
21 pages Open
Pages 1-4: Lockhart discusses her family and education. Lockhart recounts how and
why she came to the University of Florida, and in what capacity she first began her
career in Gainesville. Lockhart describes her time working for Alachua County and the
actions she took as part of the Community Action Program in the 1960s. She
discusses what it was like as a white woman to go into black communities and work on
poverty and civil rights issues
Pages 5-7: Lockhart goes on to discuss her role on President Lyndon Johnson's
Council of Social Advisors. She describes the changes at the University of Florida
when she returned in the early 1970s. Lockhart talks about her transition from the
classroom to administration. She gives an account of the graduate school when she
was appointed dean, as well as some of the programs she began while serving as
Pages 8-11: Lockhart describes her time as dean of the Graduate School at the
University of Florida. Lockhart states the conditions that prompted her to leave the
position in the early 1990s. She discusses her connection to the Women's Studies
program at UF. Lockhart continues on to describe the feelings and discussions among
her female colleagues that eventually led to the creation of the program. She explains
the function of the program's advisory council and the changes that occurred in program
while she served on the council. Lockhart talks about the institutional barriers the
program had to overcome as it developed and expanded.
Pages 12-14: Lockhart discusses the initial enrollment of courses offered by the
Women's Studies program. Lockhart relates how her experience as an administrator
enabled her to assist the Women's Studies program in developing a curriculum and
obtaining funding. She comments on the future role of women in society, and then
describes how the Women's Studies program will have to adapt to meet that changing
role. Lockhart discusses the different ways in which the Women's Studies program
interacted with other departments at the University of Florida and the Gainesville
community in the beginning years of the program
Pages 15-18: Lockhart discusses her experiences as a female administrator in charge
of a male-dominated faculty, staff, and student population. She talks about her work
with the Center for African Studies. Lockhart then discusses in detail the course she
taught on women and economics. She states her belief that women can have both a
family and a professional career. Lockhart tells of her personal experience and relates
that history to the women of today.
Pages 19-21: Lockhart continues to discuss the evolving role of the woman as both a
mother and a professional. Lockhart states what she believes to be the practical
applications of women's studies. She describes the strong bond among the women
who founded the Women's Studies program and the strengths that each of their strong
personalities brought to the situation. Lockhart concludes by discussing the influential
role her mother played, and the positive effect her career has had on her two grown