es1203w4

ES1203: Week 4

Post-war education. Failing the ordinary child

Return to module outline.

Last updated 31.01.12.

A reminder of the Education England website . Derek Gilliard provides a treasure house of primary texts and an authoritative commentary on the development of education provision in England: Look under ‘documents’ and click onto the Norwood Report – we will look at the composition of the committee so that we can begin to get some idea as to the expertise and authority which underpinned this Report.

http://www.educationengland.org.uk/history/

You will see this week that I have used extra secondary material in order to support my discussion of the experience of post-ear education. Although the reading pack provides you with enough material to reference your essay sufficiently, the lecture notes indicate the possibility of further reading and demonstrate how you should reference your comments in essays. If you want to use these sources in your essays please do go and look at the books /articles themselves – don’t just lift them straight off the lecture notes – you need to see how they are used in the original piece. You will then be developing good academic practice.

I have commented on the lecture notes in italics why I have used references at different points in order to help you understand why we reference so much in academic writing.

Last week we considered the main points of the 1944 Education Act.

It raised the status of education as a government priority – there was a Ministry rather than a Board of Education

Local Education Authorities were responsible for deciding how to implement the provision for secondary education for all according to ability and aptitude

The Act was based upon a White Paper Educational Reconstruction which took into consideration the Hadow, Spens and Norwood Reports. It suggested but did not legislate for three types of schools; the grammar, technical and secondary modern

Section 8 (1) of the Act stated:

‘If a child shows that he or she is not likely to benefit by specialising in literary studies and in other things that go to lay the formation of that type of mind that will do honour to the professions then it is important that the child should have a sound chance in developing craftsmanship and ability in handwork as it is upon the skill and upon the industrial and technical aptitude that much of the future of the country will depend. Hence the necessity for different schools of varying types and of sound methods of selecting pupils for the type of secondary school for which their aptitude best fits them’ (1944 Education Act in Ikin1944: 15).

The above reference is a direct quote – I wanted the exact form of words in order to make my point – and I reference the edition of the 1944 Education Act that I am using so that a reader could go back and find the quote for themselves and read further if they should wish to – so I give brief details including the page and then the full reference at the end.

Some Local Authorities interpreted that to mean that a variety of forms of secondary education could be provided on one site but most put into action a plan for three different schools on three different sites.

The experience of secondary education post 44

So, we can see that far from a hidden agenda to prevent a vast majority of children from receiving the benefits of a grammar type education the aspirations of the Act were to provide education for all children from 11 to 16 (although initially the school leaving age was raised to 15) in a way that would match their interests and abilities and prepare all pupils for employment appropriate to their abilities.

But, such a radical change in the provision of state education based selection by ability not social class inevitably hit some problems.

The 1950s saw the growth of sociology and sociology of education as an academic discipline (Banks, 1955). Once the 1944 system was well established it became a popular area of sociological study. A number of studies showed clearly how access to the grammar school or secondary modern appeared to be dependent on class. (Floud et al, 1956;Douglas, 1964, 1968)

These references above – Banks, Floud, Douglas are used to give weight to what otherwise would just have been an assertion on my part. I am using them to show to the reader where these ideas come from. I don’t need a page reference because I am indicating that these publications cover the whole range of what I am talking about.

Tripartism and social class inequality

McCulloch notes that grammar / secondary modern divide effectively became a middle / working class divide. (McCulloch, & Sobell, 1994). How did that fit with ideas of testing for an innate IQ?

Here I use a reference to a journal; article, demonstrating a wide range of sources to support my argument – this enables the reader to pick up on an interest and go back and read more for themselves – the reader would also expect you to have read this piece and understand the main points. Journal articles are always particularly useful because they give you very good reference lists at the end to extend your reading further. Most are available online through the library – do get used to using this resource and also look at the History of Education Society website and their bibliographic database ‘Exelibris’ – it does not hold actual copies of the articles but it helps you to identify a reading list. There are also hard copies of many journals in the stacks in the library – ask the librarians if you are not sure where the stacks are.

Butler’s vision of one England was not provided by the education system which his Act had set up.

Even in the grammar schools there were clear demarcations according to class.

Middle-class children (in this case measured by father’s occupation) were more likely to stay at school and complete the full secondary course than working-class children.
Provision of academic material at home and space in which to work were real dividers in the attainment levels of grammar pupils.

If this was an essay rather than lecture notes with me set up as ‘the expert’ I should have referenced where I could find evidence for my two comments above (actually – see McCulloch and his book Failing the Ordinary Child)

Secondary Modern schools

Secondary education had to combine a unity of purpose with differences in general ability. Secondary modern schools, would, it was envisaged, be the site where a majority of the nation’s children were educated.

In 1955 there were over 3500 secondary modern schools in England. 50% co-ed.

April 1945: The Nation’s Schools: their plan and purpose.

A balanced education that is at once, both practical and general, which will equip a large number of the country’s future citizens to enter the larger world trained in character, adaptable, and awake to the possibilities that lie within themselves of finding and pursuing interests both of mind and hand that will aide their further development and add to the pleasure of their life

(Nation’s Schools; 1945, p.22) I’m using a primary source here, so more likely to use a ‘verbatim’ i.e ‘word for word’ quote.

High hopes for the Secondary Moderns were compromised by:

· Lack of provision after 15 (Few County Colleges were established)

· No facilities to take public exams

· Therefore less preparation for new technologies and the workplace

· Less qualified teachers than grammar schools

· Little opportunity to transfer to grammar school at 13

· Frequent use of the old elementary school buildings – low prestige in neighbourhood

11+ became classed as pass/fail (i.e grammar/ secondary modern) rather than a test of suitability

It is important to see these problems within their context:

· The idea of secondary moderns, based on non-selective admission was to get away from the rigid exam driven curriculum of the grammar and technical schools.

Each school had the freedom to develop its own curriculum to suit not just the interests of the children attending the school but the needs of the locality as well.
Freedom and flexibility were supposed to be the catchwords of the system; as a result project and interdisciplinary work became very popular. The extra year at school, from 14 to 15, became problematic for some children. Without any apparent purpose in the curriculum, project work degenerated into cutting and sticking.
It was anticipated that most of these children would be involved in routine and repetitive work after they left school, or, in the case of girls, involved in caring for a family. The secondary modern curriculum was designed to prepare them for such a role.
But: the 1950s were a period of high employment and economic expansion and technical advances meant that increasingly employers needed a more highly skilled workforce. With the vast majority of adolescents leaving school before they were 16 the employers’ need was not being met.

(Taylor, 1963)

Tripartitism and gender inequalities

Curricula in secondary modern schools tended to be more highly gendered than in the grammar schools.
Emphasis on practical subjects inevitably meant that girls spent more time in cookery, needlework, laundry and mothercraft lessons.
Grammar school girls were subject to ‘domestic science’ lessons but rarely to mothercraft. Domestic science lessons were often taken in the first years of secondary school and dropped as O’ levels loomed. O’ level cookery and needlework became increasingly theoretical but were usually taken by the lower streams.
Because girls tended to do better in the 11+ than boys it was often the case that a girl getting the same score in the 11+ as a boy in the same primary school would go to the secondary modern while he would gain a place at the local grammar school

(Spencer, 2004; 2005- I am referring here to something I have written and published – by all means refer to the tutors’ published work because anything published goes through a number of stages to ensure that it is as accurate as possible – but never quote from our lecture notes – of course we do our best to ensure they are accurate but they have not been through the same process and therefore have less authority)

Again, in order to understand this we have to consider the context of post war society

When the second war finished, day nurseries that had been set up to look after young children while mothers took part in war work closed, almost overnight. There was a strong drive to encourage women back into their homes. This ensured that:
There would be jobs available to men returning from the war.
Women would be at the domestic centre of rebuilding the ‘traditional’ family unit post-war.
Childcare theory centred around the idea of ‘maternal deprivation’ – that is children deprived of their mother’s company would become delinquent and ‘maladjusted’. (John Bowlby)
Girls of all abilities, but especially the ‘average’ girl, needed training for their ‘special’ role in post-war reconstruction.
Provision for social insurance was based on the assumption of a family model with full-time employed male breadwinner and non working domestically focused wife. N.B it was her fulltime role as wife which was envisaged, not just as mother which had a more limited time span.

And then at the end a list of everything in alphabetical order that I have used in the notes – I hope these comments on referencing have been helpful and now you understand why we are so keen for you to get it right

Remember – short version in the text (author, date: page) details in the reference list at the end with publisher and full title.

References

Banks, O.(1955) Parity and Prestige in English Secondary Education, London: Routledge

Douglas, J.W.B. et al (1968) All Our Future, London: Peter Davies

Douglas, J.W.B.(1964) The Home and the School, London: MacGibbon and Kee

Floud, J.E. et al. (1956) Social Class and Educational Opportunity London: Heinemann

Ikin, A. (1944) The Education Act, 1944 , London: Isaac Pitman

Lodge, P. & Blackstone, T.(1982) Educational Policy and Educational Inequality, Oxford: Martin Robertson

McCulloch, G. & Sobell, L.(1994) Towards a social history of the secondary modern schools, History of Education 23 (3) pp.275-286

Ministry of Education Pamphlet 1 (1945) The Nation’s Schools: their plan and purpose, London: HMSO

Spencer, S. (2004) Reflections on the ‘Site of Struggle’ girls’ experience of secondary education in the late 1950s, History of Education, 33 (4)

Spencer, S (2005) Gender, Work and Education in Britain in the 1950s, Basingstoke; Palgrave Macmillan

Taylor, W.(1963) The Secondary Modern School, London: Faber and Faber

Click on the link below for a treasure house of primary texts and an authoritative commentary on the development of education provision in England:

http://www.educationengland.org.uk/history/

I have commented on the lecture notes in italics why I have used references at different points in order to help you understand why we reference so much in academic writing.

Last week we considered the main points of the 1944 Education Act.

It raised the status of education as a government priority – there was a Ministry rather than a Board of Education

Local Education Authorities were responsible for deciding how to implement the provision for secondary education for all according to ability and aptitude

Section 8 (1) of the Act stated:

The experience of secondary education post 44

But, such a radical change in the provision of state education based selection by ability not social class inevitably hit some problems.

Tripartism and social class inequality

McCulloch notes that grammar / secondary modern divide effectively became a middle / working class divide. (McCulloch, & Sobell, 1994). How did that fit with ideas of testing for an innate IQ?

Here I use a reference to a journal; article, demonstrating a wide range of sources to support my argument – this enables the reader to pick up on an interest and go back and read more for themselves – the reader would also expect you to have read this piece and understand the main points. Journal articles are always particularly useful because they give you very good reference lists at the end to extend your reading further. Most are available online through the library – do get used to using this brilliant resource – there are also hard copies of many journals in the stacks in the library – ask the librarians if you are not sure where the stacks are.

Butler’s vision of one England was not provided by the education system which his Act had set up.

Even in the grammar schools there were clear demarcations according to class.

Middle-class children (in this case measured by father’s occupation) were more likely to stay at school and complete the full secondary course than working-class children.
Provision of academic material at home and space in which to work were real dividers in the attainment levels of grammar pupils.

Secondary Modern schools

In 1955 there were over 3500 secondary modern schools in England. 50% co-ed.

April 1945: The Nation’s Schools: their plan and purpose.

(Nation’s Schools; 1945, p.22) I’m using a primary source here, so more likely to use a ‘verbatim’ i.e ‘word for word’ quote.

High hopes for the Secondary Moderns were compromised by:

· Lack of provision after 15 (Few County Colleges were established)

· No facilities to take public exams

· Therefore less preparation for new technologies and the workplace

· Less qualified teachers than grammar schools

· Little opportunity to transfer to grammar school at 13

· Frequent use of the old elementary school buildings – low prestige in neighbourhood

11+ became classed as pass/fail (i.e grammar/ secondary modern) rather than a test of suitability

It is important to see these problems within their context:

· The idea of secondary moderns, based on non-selective admission was to get away from the rigid exam driven curriculum of the grammar and technical schools.

Each school had the freedom to develop its own curriculum to suit not just the interests of the children attending the school but the needs of the locality as well.
Freedom and flexibility were supposed to be the catchwords of the system; as a result project and interdisciplinary work became very popular. The extra year at school, from 14 to 15, became problematic for some children. Without any apparent purpose in the curriculum, project work degenerated into cutting and sticking.
It was anticipated that most of these children would be involved in routine and repetitive work after they left school, or, in the case of girls, involved in caring for a family. The secondary modern curriculum was designed to prepare them for such a role.
But: the 1950s were a period of high employment and economic expansion and technical advances meant that increasingly employers needed a more highly skilled workforce. With the vast majority of adolescents leaving school before they were 16 the employers’ need was not being met.

(Taylor, 1963 – this is the same ‘Taylor’ who has offered the extra seminars for you)

Tripartitism and gender inequalities

Curricula in secondary modern schools tended to be more highly gendered than in the grammar schools.
Emphasis on practical subjects inevitably meant that girls spent more time in cookery, needlework, laundry and mothercraft lessons.
Grammar school girls were subject to ‘domestic science’ lessons but rarely to mothercraft. Domestic science lessons were often taken in the first years of secondary school and dropped as O’ levels loomed. O’ level cookery and needlework became increasingly theoretical but were usually taken by the lower streams.
Because girls tended to do better in the 11+ than boys it was often the case that a girl getting the same score in the 11+ as a boy in the same primary school would go to the secondary modern while he would gain a place at the local grammar school

Again, in order to understand this we have to consider the context of post war society

When the second war finished, day nurseries that had been set up to look after young children while mothers took part in war work closed, almost overnight. There was a strong drive to encourage women back into their homes. This ensured that:
There would be jobs available to men returning from the war.
Women would be at the domestic centre of rebuilding the ‘traditional’ family unit post-war.
Childcare theory centred around the idea of ‘maternal deprivation’ – that is children deprived of their mother’s company would become delinquent and ‘maladjusted’. (John Bowlby)
Girls of all abilities, but especially the ‘average’ girl, needed training for their ‘special’ role in post-war reconstruction.
Provision for social insurance was based on the assumption of a family model with full-time employed male breadwinner and non working domestically focused wife. N.B it was her fulltime role as wife which was envisaged, not just as mother which had a more limited time span.