Blog 4 The Wider Meaning of
Education
One
of the more interesting references made by Boyd is to Juan Luis Vives
(1482 – 1540) i
who told his students that they
“should not be ashamed to enter shops and factories and to ask
craftsmen questions and to get to know the details of their work.”
The implication is that the
student could learn from this experience. However, I do not believe
that there is any suggestion that the craftsmen are themselves
educated. And yet it is clear that the craftsmen have
skills and knowledge which they were putting to use in the production
of whatever their work entailed. They were clearly educated, but not
within the concept of
education held by the ruling elite throughout history. A concept that
Boyd so carefully and systematically charts in his book ii.
It is however a fact that all civilisations are built upon the work
of citizens, or whatever word you wish to describe that section of
the population that produces whatever is necessary for that
civilisation
to survive. As Boyd also points out in this section, the educated
elite are largely
in ignorance of this work. If we analyse the work that ordinary
people perform, even in the simplest of economies, we find that that
work entails considerable
knowledge and skill. As a species, the initial development that
separated us from other species was our ability to design and make
tools in order to change
our environment to better meet our needs. A
great deal of education, in the wider sense that I wish to consider,
takes place outside of the structures that Boyd so carefully
considers.
As
a simple example of this, we can consider the work of a shepherd in
ancient times. The work
involved a lot more than standing in a field watching over the sheep.
The shepherd
had to have an understanding of the animal. He had to be able to cope
with such things as delivering the new born lambs, be
able to deal with other
physical problems that might affect the sheep. He had to be aware of
environmental problems, a detailed knowledge of the weather and an
ability to forecast bad weather and to know what steps to take to
care for his flock. He had to be aware of the dangers of predators,
to recognise their presence and to act to safeguard the sheep. All of
this knowledge he acquired in a variety of ways, through watching
others perform the task, talking to them and observing the
environment and learning from all of this. Similar considerations
could be given to other forms of labour. The pyramids
of Egypt would not have been built without the skill of the
astronomers and architects, the craftsmanship of the stone masons and
the physical dexterity of a mass of labourers. Jean
Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778) made the point that among savages,
living in a state of nature, education goes on by of itself, without
direction from any one. The only chance
of survival for the savage is to learn from experience how to equip
himself to the conditions
of his lifeiii
Moving
closer to present times, I remember my time on the coalface, studying
the work of the collier. For
those with little knowledge of what is involved this seems to depend
upon brute strength and nothing more. But in actual fact the work
depends upon a detailed and refined knowledge of both the environment
and of the geology. It is of course a very dangerous environment and
it requires that those working in that environment are able to
correctly interpret all the signs, signals and sounds that
are continually present. But that is only part of the knowledge
required. The knowledge of geology enables the collier to understand
the way the coal has formed and this enables them to work the coal
using the clefts , fissures and breaks in the seam to ease
the lumps of coal away from the wall of coal facing them. The
difference between the ability of an experienced collier and a new
recruit is substantial. This brief account does not take into account
all the others skills involved such as setting supports, building
packs timbering up dangerous areas and many other aspects of a
profession that is now in many ways a memory.
I
recently watched a programme about the village of Cromford. Towards
the end a woman spoke about the primitive Methodists and their
influence.
I
have always been impressed by the early Methodists. They were part of
a working class community. They were largely self educated. Central
to their form of worship was the Methodist Hymn book. This contains
some very fine poetry. An example that sticks in my mind are two
lines from one of Charles Wesley’s hymns “our God contracted to a
span, incomprehensibly
made man”. Not only did they sing lines like this but they
understood the deep theological meaning encompassed in those few
words. If you stop and think about what it says you find an
incredible amount
of detailed theology. But Primitive Methodism was not just about hymn
singing. They saw
the cross as a symbol, pointing upwards to God and outwards to their
fellow human beings. Their beliefs included a social concern. They
were conscious that they were not simple individuals but part of a
community. They took their ideas out of the Chapel and into the
community. They saw its relevance in the fields of trade unionism and
in politics. The advances of knowledge may have made part of their
beliefs no longer valid but
their social aspirations are just as relevant today.
In my introductory Blog I
outlined the background influences on my opinions. Second to the
Chapel was the Working Mens Club. These are often decried as mere
drinking clubs but this demonstrates an ignorance of the function
they played in the lives of working class people. They were another
way in which the working class sought to exert some control over
their own lives. They proved that they could organised and develop
structures to meet certain needs. They actually began as temperance
institutions but success only came when they allowed the use of
alcoholiv.
But this was only part of their provision. They provided
entertainment that could not be obtained elsewhere. They also
encouraged other forms of interests and activities by such means as
their produce shows which encourage members to bring the flowers and
vegetables from their gardens amd allotments to displays their
successes and to encourage others to follow similar pursuits. The
aspect of the Club that I wish particularly to draw attention to is
the role it played in encouraging indoor sportsv.
My dad, in his youth, was an indoors games champion. I learnt to play
solo whist by sitting by his side and watching him play. He had a
skill far above anything that I could master. When playing dominoes
or cards with my dad, he would know more about what was in my hand
that I did. He had the ability to analyse the play and work out
logically what the lay of the cards or dominoes was. Sheer
intellectual ability. In talking in these terms, I have to emphasise
that my dad left school at fourteen. He was the eldest boy and so
travelled through life with all the responsibilities that that
entailed.
What I have tried to show is
that the working class is not a lumpen group of ignorant people who
need to be told what to do from outside of the class. There is an
immense amount of talent within the working class. But this does not
mean that education in the sense that Boyd investigates is not
important. What is at fault is the ruling elite assumptions about
education. What I intend to do is to present formal education from a
working class perspective.
John Dewey (1859 – 1952)
made a valuable point when he noted that the modern child lives in a
world of manufactured goods but has only a vague idea of how they
came into being. The country child, a century ago, was more fortunate
in his daily experience because he saw these processes. His ordinary
life was of much greater educational worth both on an intellectual
and moral side than a modern childvi.
What was true when Dewey was writing is even more so in our modern
society. The purpose of education is to prepare young people for life
in our modern society. As we have seen with the Primitive Methodists
this implies both an individual and a social approach. The formal
logic that dominates contemporary thinking implies a sharp
delineation between these two aspects of life. The rights of the
individual is stressed to the exclusion of the rights of the social.
This stress is mainly in order to maintain the rights of property
thereby justifying the rule of a minority over the majority. As we
have seen, and as people experience in their daily lives, the two
aspects are intimately joined together. It is impossible to live a
life as an individual, every aspect of one’s life is linked in with
other people in an intricate substantial manner. Even the iconoclast
who lived at the top of a pole relied on other people to provide him
with food. We recognise the need for formal education but need to
question the nature of the education that is being provided.
Granville Stanley Hall (1846 –
1924) set out his ideas in his book Adolescence. He believed
that the knowledge and skills required in our complex civilisation
required a different form of education. “As early as eight but not
before the child should be put in a classroom and brought under the
influences to meet of which there can at first be little response.
There is certain to be more passivity but happily he learns under
pressure. Never again will there be such susceptibility to drill and
discipline such plasticity to habituation or such ready adjustment to
new conditions. It is an an age of external and mechanical training
and reading, writing, drawing and manual training, musical technique,
foreign tongues and their pronunciation, the manipulation of numbers
and geometrical elements and many kinds of skills now have their
golden hour, but if it passes unimproved they can never be acquired
later without a heavy handicap of disadvantage and loss. These
necessities may be bad for the health of the body, sense, mind as
well as morals but pedagogical art consists in breaking the child
into them as intensely and as quickly as possible with minimum
strain, and with the least amount of explanation and coquetting for
natural interestsvii.”
I provide this quotation from
Boyd in full because it present a view of education, in its starkest
form, which is prevalent in our modern system. I do not believe that
it is a view held by teachers or professionals within the education
service, but I do believe it is held by influential elements in the
ruling elite who determine policy. Apart from the statement that our
civilisatiom is complex, I profoundly disagree with virtually every
other statement. Hall present the aim of education to be to bring the
child under the influence of an outside force, not stated but
presumably that of the State. The suggestion is that the child should
learn under pressure. This is the exact opposite of what writers,
such as Francois de Salignac de la Mothe Fenelon (1631 - 1715)viii,
state as for example when he suggested that studies should be made
agreeable, the fewer formal lessons the better, and when he said that
he had seen children learn to read through play. Hall sees childhood
as a time when children are susceptible to drill and discipline so
that they can be molded into the form that is required of them. He
goes on to talk about external and mechanical training, where as
Fenelon stresses the value of story telling and educational play.
Hall recognises that the methods he advocates are bad for the health
of body, sense and mind. as well as morals, but for him this is
irrelevant. For Hall the pedagogical art consists in BREAKING the
child as intensely and as quickly as possible. He speaks as if he
were training a horse or a dog to perform specific tasks. But
children are different, they are human beings who have developed the
faculty to observe, to understand, to learn and to create. Hall
speaks of giving the least amount of explanation and coquetting for
natural interest. In other words his aim in education is to prevent
the very things which make children children. One of the most common
words a child uses is to ask Why? There is no better starting point
for education than by deciding to do the exact opposite of what Hall
suggests.
In our consideration of the
purpose of education we should start from the individual. Each and
everyone of us has a right to the full development of our own
personality, the ability to meet our needs, to satisfy our particular
aims, to be able to study those aspects of life and literature and
whatever that we wish, to be able to dream and to imagine, to create
and express our feelings and being, to be the person we want to be.
All of this we must be able to do within the context of the society
of which we are part. We cannot exist apart from society. This means
that the aims of education must be to enable this. Peter Abelard
(1079 – 1142) said that constant questioning was the key to wisdom.
For through doubt we are led to inquiry, by inquiry we ascertain
truthix.
Peter Ramus (1515 – 1572) resented uncritical appeal to authority,
he wanted for himself and for others the right to think with
freedomx.
Rene Descartes (1596 – 1650) urged that we accept nothing as true
which does not approve itself to the mind with clearness and
distinction. He set out a procedure of reducing problems to their
simplest elements and moving step by step from assured knowledge of
what is simple to assured knowledge of what is complexxi.
Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762 – 1834) saw the importance of
education, but in order to achieve his aim, he proposed that children
be separated from the corrupt society they were one day to reformxii
Equally Rousseau in Emile considered that it was only possible
to educate one person. But, despite the positive aspects of their
beliefs, their error was in separating the learner from the society.
Fichte was quite right in wanting to transform society but that has
to be accomplished within society. The struggle to transform our
system of education, at all levels, to meet the needs of our young
people, who face problems as great as any generation of young people
has ever faced, must go along with the struggle to transform the
nature of society. The problem we face is to challenge the
individualism and competitiveness that is embedded within capitalism
and to create a society in which the individual and society are
completely united in harmony. Such a society is possible and is the
only solution that will provide a future for mankind.
Scribart 27.09.20
i Boyd
pp 179 – 181
ii The
History of European Education by William Boyd as revised and
enlarged by Edmund J King
iii Boyd pp292 - 301
iv I
should, I feel, acknowledge that I am a teatotaller. This does not
prevent me from giving due worth to both the chapel, which I long
ago stopped attending and to the Club of which I am no longer a
member.
v By
‘indoor sports’ I am referring to Snooker, Billiards, Darts,
dominoes,card games particularly forms of whist and long alley
skittles.
vi Boyd
pp 398 - 407
vii
Boyd pp 394 - 398
v Boyd
pp 221/2
xi Boyd
pp 255/6
xii Boyd
pp 333-338
Comments
Post a Comment